[od-discuss] SPDX license taxonomy

[Andrew Katz]

Mike

<snip>
> 
> AFAIK their 2.0 won't change how they see licenses at all; the finer grained
> thing is how they model licensed material, at least that's what I gather from a
> recent slide deck
> https://lists.spdx.org/pipermail/spdx/attachments/20140402/0e357fce/attachm
> ent-0001.pdf

Yes, that's what I understood from talking to Jilayne Lovejoy.

> In any case we're initially only interested in their repository of license texts. If
> some additional collaboration with them on license metadata (beyond naming
> implied by file names in their repo) turns out to be useful, that'd be fine too.

Agreed. I was more concerned that we kept our taxonomies of licences compatible, so that if we came across a new licence, we could agree between us what code name to give it. What I don't yet know is how techniques for recording modular licence options might develop - at the moment, for example, the CC list of licences is given different names depending on the options selected, but I can see at some point that the options might themselves be standardised. This would enable the additional permissions under of GPL3 to recognised, for example.

This is not something to worry about now, but is something I'd like to keep an eye on. I'm interested in how SPDX might develop anyway, so I may have a chat with Jilayne, and report back if I find out anything interesting.


> Let me know if I'm missing something.

Not at all 

Best


Andrew