Copy License XML files to the data repo

[goneall]

Once the legal team officially declares the XML files as a stable standard format for use outside the legal team, we should copy the XML source files to the license-list-data repository under a folder license-xml.

Originally, I was thinking of enhancing the license-list-publisher, but since these files are not transformed in any way, we can just add a line in the makefile to copy the file. The line would be added immediately before this line:

license-list-XML/Makefile

Line 40 in 65dd995

git -C '$(LICENSE_OUTPUT_DIR)' add -A .

[jlovejoy]

@goneall - do we need to discuss any aspects of what it means to make the XML files as a stable standard format (other than saying that)?

[goneall]

do we need to discuss any aspects of what it means to make the XML files as a stable standard format (other than saying that)?

Good question. I opened a related issue 5 years ago in the SPDX spec discussing where we document the specific fields which has not been resolved. Perhaps we should decide where we want to add the technical documentation for the XML fields (as well as the JSON, XML, and RDF license specific fields).

[zvr]

@goneall your last comment on the issue you refer to about documenting the fields mentions

I'm only suggesting we document the fields that are published on the website and in the license-list-data repo. I'm NOT suggesting we document fields used internally by the legal team in the spec. Those should only be documented in the license-list-XML repo.

If there are differences in the set of fields, simply copying the XML over (as the first comment on this issue) suggests, won't work.

Personally, I would really like to have more discussion before declaring "the XML files as a stable standard format" and I don't think it should be only in the legal team, as it involves XML technical stuff. I mean, we should be publishing an ontology, with clear explanations on how <alt> works, etc.

[goneall]

@zvr Good point - my last comment is definitely out of date. If we make the license XML official, all the fields should be documented.

I'm still traveling for the next 2 weeks with limited connectivity, perhaps when were back we can schedule a joint legal/tech team call to discuss both making the license list XML format official and how/where/why we document the specific fields.

One other topic would be whether we include the license XML within the JSON and RDF license metadata. I didn't think about that possibility until just now. We currently include the template text (which we would re-characterize as "legacy template" format once we support license XML).

[goneall]

Pinging @jlovejoy and @swinslow to review the above meeting proposal and discussion.

[swinslow]

@goneall @zvr I'm on-board with us setting up a joint legal/tech team call at some point once @goneall is back, to discuss these details about formalizing and making "official" the license list XML format. I'll mention this during the legal team call today so that others are aware.

[jlovejoy]

agree with @swinslow - this would be good to discuss on a joint call. it also relates to some questions that came up when I was updating the matching guidelines to reference the XML tags. there are more tags than are "relevant" to the matching guidelines that could use better documentation, so I think that's kind of part of this?

[swinslow]

No further discussion on this (to my recollection) during the 3.19 documentation release cycle. Moving to "Later Release".

Looks like next steps here should be:

• joint call with participants from Legal and Tech Team, to determine whether to proceed with this
• if so, may be necessary to improve documentation around the XML fields. We've added semi-formal guidance documentation about this during 3.19, and the XML schema file is available, but to be discussed if more is needed.