markup change to MIT-Khronos-old #2496
Conversation
In the review in spdx#2017 it was said that this paragraph: This text may be omittable (B.3.5 Guideline: omittable text), as it is merely informative or explanatory, not any right grant or restriction. but the optional tags were not added in the initial commit. Adding now.
|
Hi @xsuchy, thanks for this. I'm not sure I agree with that conclusion from the reviewer of the issue originally. I think they were proposing to make that optional in the course of deciding whether it could be considered a match for standard MIT (which we decided it wasn't, hence the new ID). If we make that paragraph optional, then I think the only differences between this and the standard MIT license would be using "Materials" instead of "Software as the defined term; and an "and/or" instead of "and" in the first sentence. Just to ask, though, are you seeing any instances of the MIT-Khronos-old text appearing without that central paragraph? Put another way, are there examples you're encountering where making this paragraph optional would cause it to match a license text you've seen? |
Yes. |
|
Got it, thanks @xsuchy! @jlovejoy So this is a tricky one. It is either (1) very close to standard MIT, except with "Materials" instead of "Software" and a couple of other very minor changes: 
...or (2) very close to MIT-Khronos-old, but without the central paragraph: 
Do you have a preference for how to handle this? I'd lean towards minor markup to MIT as I think that's substantively closer rather than making the central paragraph optional for the Khronos variant, but I could be persuaded either way. |
In the review in #2017 it was said that this paragraph: This text may be omittable (B.3.5 Guideline: omittable text), as it is merely informative or explanatory, not any right grant or restriction.
but the optional tags were not added in the initial commit. Adding now.