Hi Cameron,
Cameron McCormack wrote on 02/15/2009 11:54:45 PM:
> Doug Schepers:
> > > I would suggest that a separate file be made with the appropriate
Java
> > > interface file, with the appropriate license, and that it be linked
from
> > > an errata (and later a second edition).
> > >
> > > Wo
Doug Schepers:
> > I would suggest that a separate file be made with the appropriate Java
> > interface file, with the appropriate license, and that it be linked from
> > an errata (and later a second edition).
> >
> > Would this work for you, and for the rest of the WebApps WG?
Cameron McCormack
Cameron McCormack:
> The question then is whether we want to include it. I don’t see how it
> would be beneficial for anyone to redistribute one of the interface
> files if it has been changed incompatibly, so I guess I don’t see the
> need for it.
Some further off-list discussion regarding gene
Philippe Le Hegaret:
> This resolved the issue for the debian community at that time and the
> DOM Java interfaces have been distributed by Debian since then. This is
> why the DOM Level 2 and 3 specifications have included the software
> licenses with a modified statement ever since.
Thanks for
I was asked to help understanding what the DOM Working Group did on the
topic of bindings license.
The DOM Working Group made a decision to have the bindings for
ECMAScript, Java, and IDL normative. Thus, we included those in the DOM
specifications itself, as appendices. This was what happened fo
Doug Schepers:
> My opinion is that the editor of the Element Traversal spec simply
> didn't know what he was doing (no offense).
:-)
> I would suggest that a separate file be made with the appropriate Java
> interface file, with the appropriate license, and that it be linked from
> an errata (an
Paul Libbrecht wrote on 01/12/2009 07:24:52 AM:
> I would like to add the wish to add this file as a jar within a W3C
> maven repository,
>
> maven is a build system based on declarative dependencies marking.
> The objective of a W3C maven repository would be to offer, in a way
> transparent to
I would like to add the wish to add this file as a jar within a W3C
maven repository,
maven is a build system based on declarative dependencies marking.
The objective of a W3C maven repository would be to offer, in a way
transparent to people that "just checkout souces", a linking to W3C
co
Hi Doug,
Would it be possible to include the Javadoc (i.e. the text from the
specification describing the interface and its methods) in the source file?
This would be very helpful for users.
Thanks.
Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: mrgla...@ca.ibm.com
E-mail:
Hi, Cameron-
My opinion is that the editor of the Element Traversal spec simply
didn't know what he was doing (no offense).
I would suggest that a separate file be made with the appropriate Java
interface file, with the appropriate license, and that it be linked from
an errata (and later a secon
Hello WG.
A question[1] just came up within the ASF about the license under which
the ElementTraversal Java interface is made.
Unlike some other W3C specifications, where Java interface files are
made available as separate files (perhaps within a ZIP file) with a
header at the top that states th
11 matches
Mail list logo
