The order of operations is a different issue, I think. I guess the SPDX spec assumes, as you say, that commutativity of AND and OR is implicit (like counterpart operations in propositional logic), but this implicit property was not obvious to one Fedora contributor.
Richard On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 4:08 PM J Lovejoy <opensou...@jilayne.com> wrote: > > Hi Richard, > > Annex D explains the order of precedence for the operators and use of > parentheses. https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/SPDX-license-expressions/ > > I admit, I find the use of parentheses easier to understand overall (than > relying on remembering the order of precedence). > > I’m not sure it explicitly states that "MIT AND Apache-2.0" is equivalent to > "Apache-2.0 AND MIT” but I think that’s kind of implicit, no? > > I also think this entire annex could use a re-write to make it a bit more > user-friendly (on the topic of improving documentation…) > > Jilayne > > > On Jul 17, 2022, at 12:21 PM, Richard Fontana <rfont...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > I'm working on some draft documentation for Fedora around use of SPDX > > expressions in RPM spec file License: fields. I was surprised to > > apparently not see anything in the SPDX spec that says that the AND > > and OR operators are commutative. I want to assert that the expression > > "MIT AND Apache-2.0" is equivalent to "Apache-2.0 AND MIT". Does the > > SPDX spec actually take no position on this? > > > > Richard > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3182): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/message/3182 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/92443713/21656 Group Owner: spdx-legal+ow...@lists.spdx.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-legal/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
