Re: Re: [exslt-manage] licensing

On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 06:17 -0400, [email protected] wrote:
> Uche Ogbuji <[email protected]> wrote ..
> > On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 18:40 +0100, Mordecai Zibkoff wrote:
> > > I would like to use exslt as part of a commercial product. what if any
> > > licensing things do I have to worry about?
> > 
> > I can't answer you formally, and that is problem #1 with EXSLT right
> > now.  The licensing is unclear.  For my part, they current work product,
> > including the Web contents and the template-based implementations, are
> > public domain.  Jeni explicitly said the same on the list:
> > 
> > "Yes; all the EXSLT functions and templates are free for anyone to use."
> > 
> > It would be nice to have something more formal in place.
> > 
> > My thoughts on the matter, again from last year:
> > 
> > -- % --
> > [Shall we use] the CC "Attribution" license?
> 
> I have no probs with this type of license.
> 
> note that I am doing a complete analysis of EXSLT (for a paper presented at XML Prague 2005) which does the following;
> 
> - identify current support amongst XSLT processors
> 
> - clean up broken templates
> 
> - clean up inheritance issues with templates
> 
> - add a build component using ANT which generates doc (this website), perform unit tests on templates, confirms function exists in various processors, etc.

Wow.  This would be a true mitzvah, thanks.  Let me know if you need a
hand in some matter, and certainly let Mike Brown or me know if there's
anything about the EXSLT implementation in 4Suite that needs to be
cleared up.


> In addition, I will be suggesting way forward with respect to XSLT 2.0. Generally I argue that EXSLT has done its original job...though at a minimum a good vigorous cleanup of existing artifacts should position for any future work. Once I am done (talk is June 25th), I will submit my results and new EXSLT distro back to EXSLT management list for their review...perhaps this will catalyze any new effort.

I think we should just actually package *something* as EXSLT 1.0., based
on XSLT 1.0.  Then we can always have EXSLT 1.1, 1.2, etc.  I'd say the
packaging should comprise only:

* specs
* test harnesses
* the sample template implementations

The idea being that the package is really for implementors, and those
unfortunate enough not to have access to an EXSLT impl in their tools (a
dwindling number!  Hooray!).  For most people, their XSLT implementors
would just absorb the EXSLT materials into the usual packaging and docs
for that tool.

But I think the lack of clear versioning and packaged release material
for EXSLT has been as much a source of confusion as the unstated
licensing.

Anyway, once EXSLT 1.0 is tied neatly in a bow in that way, I think we
should just open up an area for EXSLT 2.0, and call for contributions.
It's as simple as setting up an http://exslt.com/2.0/...


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net                    http://fourthought.com
http://copia.ogbuji.net                   http://4Suite.org
Use CSS to display XML, part 2 - http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/edu/x-dw-x-xmlcss2-i.html
XML Output with 4Suite & Amara - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/04/20/py-xml.html
Use XSLT to prepare XML for import into OpenOffice Calc - http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-oocalc/
Schema standardization for top-down semantic transparency - http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think31.html