Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Incompatibility in comment property for license between JSON and RDF/XML #158

Closed
goneall opened this issue Nov 20, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Incompatibility in comment property for license between JSON and RDF/XML #158

goneall opened this issue Nov 20, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
new format profile: licensing Licensing Profile and related matters
Milestone
3.0

Comments

@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Nov 20, 2019

We are using JSON formats for the SPDX listed licenses in addition to the RDF/XML formats.

In RDF/XML we use the property name comment with the RDFS namespace.

The JSON file uses licenseComment.

For examples, see the Apache JSONLD file for the RDF definition and the straight JSON file for the JSON definition.

These fields should be consistent.
@goneall
Copy link
Member Author

goneall commented Nov 20, 2019

Propose using comment. Shorter, more consistent with other JSON classes as well as consistent with the RDF.

@goneall
Copy link
Member Author

goneall commented Nov 20, 2019

Since fixing this will break something, proposing we address this in SPDX 3.0.

@goneall goneall added this to the 3.0 milestone Nov 20, 2019
@kestewart
Copy link
Contributor

Based on call today, this can be fixed for the spec in 2.2, but the license list will be inconsistent and that will be addressed in 3.0

@kestewart kestewart modified the milestones: 3.0, 2.2 Nov 26, 2019
@kestewart
Copy link
Contributor

kestewart commented Mar 17, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Based on call, we will use comment for JSON in 2.2, and make XML compatible in future release. So no change in 2.2 Specification, and we'll resolve in 3.0. Should this be moved to license list XML repo or License list publisher? Will give more visibility to JSON user files.

@kestewart kestewart modified the milestones: 2.2, 3.0 Mar 17, 2020
@swinslow swinslow added the profile: licensing Licensing Profile and related matters label May 31, 2020
@swinslow swinslow mentioned this issue May 31, 2020
Closed
22 tasks
@goneall
Copy link
Member Author

goneall commented Apr 4, 2024

This is resolved in 3.0 - closing

@goneall goneall closed this as completed Apr 4, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
new format profile: licensing Licensing Profile and related matters
Projects
None yet
Milestone
3.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@goneall @swinslow @iamwillbar @kestewart