Hello Everyone, The SPDX team is hard at work on completing the spec and nailing down all of the license details. To make sure we are successful in getting SPDX accepted and adopted, we are working

The main problem is that these terms are not really context free. If you see: "This (program|library|software) is (release|made available) under the GPL version 2", you will all probably agree

I agree, distribute and make available have very different legal implications. I also believe that licensed and released are not equivalent to distribute Please consider the environment before

I agree with Tom’s comment– some of these are defined terms within the license itself (e.g. in GPL3.0, “The Program” has a specific definition), so we should becareful about making these terms

HiDan, Regardingthe equivalent terms. I have seen different commercial legal interpretationsbased on two of the sets of "equivalent" terms below. I believethat these need to be distinct. With

Posix regular expressions. Yes, (s)? means that sometimes the s is not there. -- --dmg --- Daniel M. German http://turingmachine.org

The ? notation in the template, does it mean that what preceeds in brackets is optional. ie. (s)? means that the s could or could not appear? Kate

Kim asked about Ninka. It is our license identification tool. It is really a research prototype, but it works. It is particularly good at not making mistakes, at the expense if not identifying the

First, some common equivalent words/phrases: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- license|licence distributable|licensed|released|made available can|may terms and

This should have gone out sooner so we may want to reschedule to ensure better attendance. I propose to have a quick call for those who are expecting it. For those who this note is catching off

Hi Armijn, Thanks for working through the spec, and finding the typo. ;) All updates and corrections much appreciated. In terms of the requirements, as more technical folk have started

hi all, I read the specs and saw: 1.6. Format Requirements: 1.6.1. Must be in a human readable form. 1.6.2. Must be in a syntax that a software tool can read and write. In my experience

GMT is an old term and UTC is the new black. The good thing about UTC is that it does not change, no matter how many timezones the UK skips in summer (there used to be this thing called "double summer

Bill Schineller said on Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 03:33:46PM -0400: Sorry, I won't be able to attend this session, being at a customer site for a Workshop. Bruno. -- Open Source & Linux Profession Lead

Thanks, Soeren. I believe in my memo (just to you) last week, I mentioned British Summer Time which according to my research does exist http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/info/bst.htm. It is the way

Hi Phil Please just make sure you indicate times in UTC, which equals toGMT (or to “Zulu-Time” in the NATO language.) But last week you indicated in something like ‘GreenwichDaylight Saving

http://www.spdx.org/wiki/20100909-minutes International colleagues, While I am thinking of it, most countries shift from daylight time to regular time a few weeks before the US does on Nov 7. We'll

Hi everyone, Attached are the slides John Ellis and I put together to start to organize the tasks needed for the rollout of SPDX. We are going to be asking for help — from you or others in your

Colleagues, Those interested in participating in the RDF track, please reconvene next Tuesday. Among other hot topics, we'd like to take a closer look at the ontology, which for collaborative

Hello Edd (DOAP project owner), The SPDX (http://spdx.org) working group is involved in defining a standard format for communicating the components, licenses and copyrights associated with a