[OSGeo-Standards] OGC XML schemas and FOSS4G softwaredistribution

[Jody Garnett]

Rejoining this conversation after discussion on IRC.

I would like to ask the OSGeo board to send a letter or request to the OGC
highlighting this as problem. While Carl is doing a great job keeping
communication live (thanks!) making a formal request would be something
positive OSGeo can do.

Peter has provided George Percivall as a contact point, do we have a
similar contact point to introduce George to?

--
Jody Garnett

On 16 February 2015 at 22:44, Peter Baumann <p.baumann at jacobs-university.de>
wrote:

>  recommend to contact:
>
> George Percivall
>  OGC Chief Engineer, CTO
> gpercivall at opengeospatial.org
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/gpercivall
>
> -Peter
>
>
>
> On 02/17/2015 07:35 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>
> Thanks Bas, so how do we get OGC in contact with Debian FTP masters? OSGeo
> is in this case cheering from the sidelines .. as this kind of gap is
> something that can be patched.
>
>    --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 16 February 2015 at 16:11, Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebastic at xs4all.nl>
> wrote:
>
>> On 02/16/2015 11:05 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> > Would love to have feedback from from Bas to see if the result would get
>> > past the Debian guidelines.
>>
>> Your proposed text is certainly an improvement, and more likely to be
>> acceptable to the Debian FTP masters. I cannot speak on their behalf,
>> but it seems to address the concerns raised in TinyOWS rejection thread.
>>
>>
>> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-January/017321.html
>>
>> IANAL, but I think because how the Copyright FAQ (legalfaq) is referred
>> to in the Document Notice it's clear that it's an addendum to the
>> license and should be considered part of the license terms.
>>
>> Further clarifying the terms for schemas, and also documenting the terms
>> for CITE tests in the legalfaq is likely sufficient and changes to the
>> Document & Software Notice terms themselves won't be required.
>>
>> There has not been a clear statement by the Debian FTP masters about
>> whether the OGC Software Notice are considered DFSG compliant. But
>> because of the similarity between the OGC Software Notice and W3C
>> Software Notice terms chances are good that they are DFSG compliant.
>> There is a lot of software in the Debian main repository with
>> W3C-Software licensed works.
>>
>> We need to get OGC in contact with the Debian FTP masters to get clear
>> statements from both parties on which terms apply to different works,
>> and which terms are acceptable with respect to the DFSG.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Bas
>>
>> --
>>  GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
>>  Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing listStandards at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Baumann
>  - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>    www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
>    mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
>    tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>  - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>    www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
>    tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20150218/a2bcdfc1/attachment.html>