Hi Philippe, > > SPDX-License-Identifier: .com.amazon.-.ASL-2.0 > > https://aws.amazon.com/doc/ASL-2.0 > [...] > > In a SPDX-License-identifier declaration, a Private License Identifier > > can optionally be followed by a URI pointing to the canonical license text. > > This URI should be under the control of the entity that controls the > > DNS namespace of the Private License Identifier. > > SPDX-License-Identifier is not declaring an id, but instead using ids in an > expression so I think this would break the license expression syntax may be? > Otherwise how would express something such as: > my-private-license1 AND my-private-license2 >
[G.O.] Good point on the license expressions. Including the URI expression in the license expression would make it difficult to parse. I suggest we separate this into 2 proposals. One for a standard mechanism for defining a namespace within the licenseRef ID syntax and a separate standard way of describing the URI for either a license-XML definition and/or canonical license text. For referencing the URI for the license XML or license text, we could extend the license expression syntax with additional operator(s). For example: License-ref1 DEFINEDBY https://some.uri/with/licensexml If we take this approach, we would need to do some additional work to define the operator precedence and think through the compatibility issues. I can foresee a few issues with the above proposed approach but I thought I would put it out there for consideration. Gary -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#2537): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/2537 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/29666572/21656 Group Owner: spdx-legal+ow...@lists.spdx.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
