[Accessibility] 21 May 2003 meeting agenda

Doug Beattie dbb at linkexplorer.com
Fri May 23 06:10:33 PDT 2003


Mario:

Welcome back and we look forward to having you on the calls.

Regarding your question below on licensing, if we take a page
from what the LSB-Futures uses for its criteria for selection
we will be find in this area.

The Futures group did put some word together in this area that the
other groups follow.

See: "http://www.linuxbase.org/futures/criteria/index.html" and
look for the section on "License".  It says there:
"License
The component should have at least one compliant implementation
available under an Open Source license that also promotes a "No Strings
Attached" environment for developers. This means that the developer
would be able to develop and deploy their software however they choose
using at least one standard implementation. This is interpreted to mean
that at least one implementation is available under a license that meets
the Open Source Definition but is does not prohibit propriatry usage.
The rationale for this criteria is very similar to that of the LGPL. "

The "Open Source Definition" above is a link to
"http://opensource.org/docs/definition_plain.html"

Hope this helps.

Doug

On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 03:02:07PM +0200, Mario Lang wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> First of all I'd like to apologize for my absence
> in the last few meetings.  Personally time-difficulties and
> my feeling that I can't help much anyway in voice-calls 
> prevented me from participating.
> 
> I'll try to be on the line next week though.
> 
> I'd like to raise a question before that though:
> Does the LSB have any guidelines on which licenses a API should
> be licensed under to be acceptable for a LSB standard?  I'm asking
> this since Debian has very strict guidelines on what is
> free, and what isn't.  For software to be accepted into the main
> distribution, it needs to meet the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
> 
> So, for Debian to be compliant to whatever API standards we
> are going to propse, that code needs to be free enough.
> 
> I ask this since I read about potential problems with SMIL.
> IANAL, and I didn't really check the exact concerns yet,
> but I thought its better to raise this issue now than later.
> 
> -- 
> CYa,
>   Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
>         | Get my public key via finger mlang at db.debian.org
>         | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Accessibility mailing list
> Accessibility at freestandards.org
> http://www.freestandards.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessibility

-- 
Doug Beattie
dbb at linkexplorer.com




More information about the Accessibility mailing list