search

OpenChain-Project / License-Compliance-Specification

Other
34 stars 22 forks source link

3.9 verification materials - for discussion in subsequent iteration #41

Closed andrewjskatz closed 4 years ago

andrewjskatz commented 5 years ago

For clarity the following wording should be added:

materials that demonstrate that a given requirement of the program is satisfied

This removes that ambiguity that the requirement is a requirement of the OpenChain program, not a requirement of a license for example.

MarkGisi commented 5 years ago

Actually the "requirement" here is that of the specification. Therefore I would recommend:

  materials that demonstrate that a given requirement _of the specification_ is satisfied
andrewjskatz commented 5 years ago

Yes - great - can we say materials that demonstrate that a given requirement of the specification is satisfied for the Program. This is more consistent with the rest of the wording in the specification (which talks about requirements of a Program meeting the Specification - see 6.2 for example). Also (sorry) I have noticed inconsistency in the capitalisation of "Specification".

MarkGisi commented 5 years ago

I fixed the wording in the 6.2 rationale to refer to the program (not organization) when referring to the specification.