Some recent feed back on the composite-licensing proposal [1] was that a way is needed to for particular composite licensing info to be referenced by multiple files in the tag-value format. While

Is this thing on?

Hi Peter - I'm receiving the emails. I don't really have a better alternative than what you suggest. Your proposal sounds like a pretty clean approach. It could also be easily extended if other

Thanks for responding. Just wanted to make sure since this list is new. We could do that. I think it would lead to some duplication, though. We would need very similar discussions how sections are

I'd gotten it too. Just had parked it in the "study a bit before responding", because am not really understanding what changing to this approach is really buying us. We sort of talked about this

Thanks for responding My point is that in the current structure there is no high level discussion of the tag-value format. Specifically, issues such as a overall layout, ordering issues, common

I got a start at doing a more detailed review of the zlib example posted last Wednesday. The namespace for spdx rdf is slightly different (trailing “/” is no longer present). I think the

testing spdx-tech mailing list - cc'ing kate/peter/gary. If you're all registered, for future will primarily use the mailing list Kate: shall we meet today? Per last week's general call, will follow

We have been meeting Tuesdays, 11AM-12 (Boston time) Here is meeting URL ­ permanent one hopefully http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/spdxrdf/ Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada):

I assume you are reviewing <http://www.spdx.org/system/files/openlogic-zlib-1.2.5-all-src-1.spdx_.txt>. If that is not correct please let me know. I think we should switch the namespace to

So when parsing a tag-value spdx file i can tell that that is have hit the end of data for one file in the package when i see a line that starts with "Name: "? Required ordering is hard for humans.

I move we promote <http://www.spdx.org/wiki/proposal-2010-10-21-4-composite-licensing> to an open status. This would open debate of the proposal to the full spdx group. If anyone has questions or

Are we meeting today?

Expect so, but I may be a couple of minutes late. Having to do a bit of firefighting at the moment.:(

I am also running about 3-5 min late, but I'll be on the call. Gary

Attached is the zlib example rdf I used with the pretty-printer development. It is based on the original zlib example on the SPDX examples area. Gary

Feel free to update the minutes if I missed anything. Also – could one of you point me to where the minutes are on the Wiki? Thanks, Gary

The minutes are on <http://www.spdx.org/wiki/spdx/tech/minutes>. The attached minutes looked good to me, btw.

My action item for the week was to explore the potential ways of representing the embedded (non-standard) licenses in the rdf/xml format. I have found two possible approaches: associating the license

I took the liberty of knocking together a strawman version of the spec that describes sectioning and rdf mapping mechanism for the tag-value format. This is only part of the spec. I wanted to get