Technical Team/Minutes/2016-10-25

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Oct. 25, 2016


  • Kris Reeves
  • Gary O’Neall
  • Jilayne Lovejoy
  • Bill
  • Yev
  • Kate
  • Scott
  • Mark Baushke
  • Brad Edmonson

License XML

Joint call with legal team Purpose close on as many items as we can for XML license format for the tools working with license list.

Encoding: UTF-8 to be consistent with other SPDX documents. • Kris agrees with this. Should be a fairly easy task to add to synomyms over time. • MB - is non-conformant UTF-8 an error? Gary - Yes, it should be an error. +1 Kris.

Document to be reviewed: License XML Elements and Attributes

MB: Wants to be human readable as possible List of elements and terms to be added to template?

Element: SPDX

Discussion on ways to group collection of these? Gary - Possibly retain higher level SPDX name Kris - License tag in github, not sure about including SPDX in title. Gary - prefers to see SPDX in tag as it makes it consistent with others Kris - agrees and is ok with SPDXLicenseCollection

Element: notes

Discussion on when making comment about a license, vs. comment on use of license. Jilayne - not sure that LicenseComment from 6.5 is really the same as notes field in license listproposal. Kris - reminding that this is just structured information, and free form is most useful here. Jilayne - notes field includes only fact (eg., ref’s should only be date license was released, if author has deprecated,, other factual infomation, etc.) no interpretations Gary - could add comment field? no obvious conclusion here, want to look for things to ensure we don’t prevent expansion of notes field to be structured data. Jilayne - reminder of goal of this is too make license list more parsable for tools. Gary - conclusion: keep name as to change this to “notes”, and not have comment at this time.

Element: header

Gary - too long, but too late - we’ve got this elsewhere. Kris - dislikes length, but it makes it clearer so ok.

Element: body

Kris - decided this element will be removed. Delete.

Element: copyright

Gary - copyrightText more consistent with spec. Jilayne ok with this.

Element: li

Gary - everyone ok with changing it to “item” Kris - supportive of not making it like html to avoid namespace issues. Jilayne - ok if Kris ok.

Element: b

Kris - agrees change from b to bullet is ok, will live with it. Jilayne - not thrilled, but sees why. Kris - clarity trumps. Some thoughts on input vs. output, but probably best to keep consistent. Possibly just put on its own line.

Element: p

Kris - using <paragraph> is ok and clearer, mixing psuedo html is causing more problems, so leaning to clarity. Jilayne - <p> concise is nices. Brad - <p> to mean what it does everyone else. Jilayne - preference to stay with <p>

Gary - tentative conclusion to leave it as

and give Yev and the tech team a chance to respond since there was a previous conclusion to not use HTML tags as element names. Element: br Jilayne - has a purpose for without adding space. Pro-html tag. Kris - parity with html helps us here. Concern is html and xml properly formated (use of <br />) Element: header Jilayne - lets defer this to next rev. Lots of inconsistency in the text. General comments and agreement on this for next releases. AI: Gary to check with Yev and tech team AI: Kate to share with Gary and Jilayne. - DONE.  :-) AI: Gary to post on tech team minutes, Jilayne to link from legal