Re: [odf-adoption] Test suite work

["Charles-H. Schulz" <charles-h.schulz@arsaperta.com>]

Rob,

Le 30 avr. 08 à 16:45, robert_weir@us.ibm.com a écrit :

>
> "Charles-H. Schulz" <charles-h.schulz@arsaperta.com> wrote on  
> 04/30/2008 04:54:50 AM:
>
>
> >
> > +1 fro my side. My gut feeling is to go for a subcommittee of the  
> ODF
> > TC. I however have a few additional points to raise:
> > - how would this testsuite look (online app or desktop client)?
> > - what would be its license
> > - will the OASIS be its author/copyright holder?
> >
>
> If done in OASIS, and with contributions by OASIS members, then  
> we'll need to follow the OASIS IP rules.  If we form a new TC, then  
> we get to pick from the allowed IP "modes" for OASIS TC's, most  
> likely "RF with Limited Terms", or if we work within an existing TC  
> it would inherit that TC's IP mode.

Why just not simply RF (perhaps there are practical/logistical reasons  
to it)? RF mode is what we want I think, but I am wondering if the  
documents contained in the set of test case documents shouldn't be  
released under a CC license for easier dissemination.
>
>
> The output of the TC would be at least:
>
> 1) An overview document defining the conformance assessment  
> methodology.
> 2) A set of many ODF test case documents, that are referred to by  
> the overview document
> 3) Some source code for automating the assessment procedure.  This  
> would not be mandatory, but assessors may find it useful.  This  
> could be server or client based.
> 4) Some source code for tools that the TC shares for automating some  
> of the test production tasks, such as validating test files to the  
> ODF schema, inserting test case metadata into test case files,  
> stripping out extraneous vendor settings from test case files, etc.
>
> We would want to verify this all with OASIS staff, of course, but my  
> reading is that all member contributions to a TC come with both a  
> non-exclusive copyright assignment (to OASIS) as well as patent  
> obligations to make available essential claims to those who make,  
> use, sell, etc., things that implement the specification.

Yes, I think you're right. Thanks for the clarification.

Best,

Charles-H. Schulz
Associé / Founding Partner,
Ars Aperta