- Ann Thorton
- Kristin Newcomer
- Bill Schineller
- Peter Williams
- Kate Stewart
- Gary O'Neall
Compare the models provided by Kate (attached) and the models from the email thread
Review/discuss the SPDX Names spreadsheet provided by Kate (attached)
There were a lot of similarities between the proposed models.
Two differences in the models were discussed:
- Abstract License which subclasses a non-standard license and a standard license vs. a License object with one subclass for standard license.
- Representing the license reference text – either as the text in the non-standard license or text in a LicenseInfo object.
For #2 – The scope was discussed as to whether text for licenses not in the standard license list and not in the file itself. The scenario discussed was if text was found in a file referencing a license which is not in the SPDX standard list of licenses, is there a way to represent the text of the license which is not in the file itself. This was described as out of scope which raised some concerns. Kate raised a concern that if this was in scope, there would be issues with the ID.
We agreed that it was confusing to have the name of the referenced license text “Non-Standard License”. Various names were discussed and we agreed to change name of Non-Standard License to “License Reference”.
Kate to follow-up on updating the diagram based on the discussion. Once that is done we can revisit the scope question and the need for Abstract License.
Kate provided a spreadsheet that compared the names for the SPDX properties used by RDF/XML, Tag/Value and the spreadsheet.
Peter agreed to fill in the RDF/XML column and update the git repository version of the spec with the resultant names.