• From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@g...>
• To: XMLDev list <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: 10 Jan 2000 17:49:56 +0100

* David Megginson
|
| As we move to SAX2, I was wondering what licensing we should use?
| Is public domain still OK?

Personally, I think so. Does anyone have any good arguments for
something more restrictive?

If we do use a license, I would recommend a BSD-like one. It has the
benefits of being unrestrictive, simple (IMHO very important) and
GPL-compatible. 

On the other hand, I can't really see that it gives us anything
compared to simply making SAX2 PD, which is even less restrictive,
even simpler and still GPL-compatible as far as I can see.

--Lars M.


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: SAX2: Which license?
    • From: Peter Murray-Rust <peter@u...>

• References:
  • SAX2: Which license?
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX2/Java: Towards a final form
• Next by Date: re: Re: Namespace prefixes optional?
• Previous by thread: Re: SAX2: Which license?
• Next by thread: Re: SAX2: Which license?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread