search

swicg / potential-charters

Discussion of potential CG and WG charters
2 stars 6 forks source link

Add recommendation for licensing to Staging Process #41

Open ThisIsMissEm opened 2 weeks ago

ThisIsMissEm commented 2 weeks ago

Whilst I've recommended the Software and Documents License, there's also additionally licenses for test suites, documents alone and a Intellectual Rights document.

ThisIsMissEm commented 2 weeks ago

In the ActivityPub Trust & Safety Taskforce's contributing.md, we have the following:

Contributions to this repository are intended to become part of Recommendation-track documents governed by the W3C Patent Policy and Software and Document License. To make substantive contributions to specifications, you must either participate in the relevant W3C Community or Working Group or make a non-member patent licensing commitment.

Maybe that is better language than that which I have used here?

evanp commented 1 week ago

There's already a section on contributions in the CG Charter. with stronger language:

Specifications created in the Community Group must use the W3C Software and Document License. All other documents produced by the group should use that License where possible.

evanp commented 1 week ago

I also think that at least at Stage 0, contributions don't need to be under the CG's IP rules -- in fact, that's the whole point.

I think we should call out when contributions need to be under the CG's contribution rules, and link to those rules directly, rather than reiterating them.

ThisIsMissEm commented 1 week ago

I think it's worth pointing out ahead of time that if you want something to get to standards track, then that's the license it'd be under