Extra paragraph for DOM Level 3 Core Java interface license

[Cameron McCormack-4]

Hi commons-dev.

The readme file[1] for the external files in XML Commons says that
everything under java/external/src/org/w3c is licensed under the the W3C
Software License, which is included in this file[2].  The DOM Level 3
Core Java interfaces are distributed with a COPYRIGHT.html file that
includes an additional licensing requirements (see [3]).

It seems to me that this paragraph should be included somewhere in the
license information in the commons external repository (and the
generated xml-apis.jar).  I haven’t checked whether any other W3C Java
interfaces have been distributed with that extra clause.

Thanks,

Cameron

[1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xml/commons/trunk/java/external/README.dom.txt
[2] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xml/commons/trunk/java/external/LICENSE.dom-software.txt
[3] http://markmail.org/message/tw2ddikfiid3qjt2

--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Hi Cameron,

Good catch. I've updated LICENSE.dom-software.txt with the text from the DOM Level 3 COPYRIGHT.html file.

Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

Cameron McCormack <cam@...> wrote on 01/13/2009 06:01:14 PM:

> Hi commons-dev.
>
> The readme file[1] for the external files in XML Commons says that
> everything under java/external/src/org/w3c is licensed under the the W3C
> Software License, which is included in this file[2].  The DOM Level 3
> Core Java interfaces are distributed with a COPYRIGHT.html file that
> includes an additional licensing requirements (see [3]).
>
> It seems to me that this paragraph should be included somewhere in the
> license information in the commons external repository (and the
> generated xml-apis.jar).  I haven’t checked whether any other W3C Java
> interfaces have been distributed with that extra clause.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cameron
>
> [1] http://svn.apache.
> org/repos/asf/xml/commons/trunk/java/external/README.dom.txt
> [2] http://svn.apache.
> org/repos/asf/xml/commons/trunk/java/external/LICENSE.dom-software.txt
> [3] http://markmail.org/message/tw2ddikfiid3qjt2
>
> --
> Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

[Cameron McCormack-4]

Michael Glavassevich:
> Good catch. I've updated LICENSE.dom-software.txt with the text from the
> DOM Level 3 COPYRIGHT.html file.

I just checked the SVG 1.1 Java interface ZIP file[1].  Its files are
included in java/external/src/org/w3c, but that ZIP file didn’t have the
extra clause.  You may have to have two LICENSE txt files, one that
includes the extra clause and one that doesn’t, and indicate in
README.dom.txt which applies to which license conditions apply to which
directory exactly.

I haven’t checked anything other than the DOM Level 3 Core and SVG 1.1
files.

Thanks,

Cameron

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/java-binding.zip

--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

[Michael Glavassevich-3]

Hi Cameron,

I'm finding that extra clause in all of the DOM Level 2 and 3 modules. Are you sure the omission wasn't an oversight by whichever WG created SVG 1.1? You would think that the W3C would have consistent licensing policies.

Thanks.

Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrglavas@...
E-mail: mrglavas@...

Cameron McCormack <cam@...> wrote on 01/13/2009 10:46:20 PM:

> Michael Glavassevich:
> > Good catch. I've updated LICENSE.dom-software.txt with the text from the
> > DOM Level 3 COPYRIGHT.html file.
>
> I just checked the SVG 1.1 Java interface ZIP file[1].  Its files are
> included in java/external/src/org/w3c, but that ZIP file didn’t have the
> extra clause.  You may have to have two LICENSE txt files, one that
> includes the extra clause and one that doesn’t, and indicate in
> README.dom.txt which applies to which license conditions apply to which
> directory exactly.
>
> I haven’t checked anything other than the DOM Level 3 Core and SVG 1.1
> files.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cameron
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/java-binding.zip
>
> --
> Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/

[Cameron McCormack-4]

Hi Michael.

Michael Glavassevich:
> I'm finding that extra clause in all of the DOM Level 2 and 3 modules.
> Are you sure the omission wasn't an oversight by whichever WG created
> SVG 1.1? You would think that the W3C would have consistent licensing
> policies.

It’s quite possible that it is an oversight.  I don’t know that there is
a definite policy.  I will ask the SVG WG.

--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/