Difference between revisions of "OGC XML Schemas and FOSS4G Software Distribution"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Tomkralidis (talk | contribs) |
Tomkralidis (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Problem Statement== | ==Problem Statement== | ||
− | FOSS4G software may encounter distribution issues when including OGC Schemas as part of the codebase. | + | FOSS4G software may encounter distribution issues when including [http://schemas.opengis.net OGC Schemas] as part of the codebase. |
==Use of OGC XML Schemas in FOSS4G Implementations== | ==Use of OGC XML Schemas in FOSS4G Implementations== | ||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
* TinyOWS: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-January/017321.html | * TinyOWS: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-January/017321.html | ||
+ | =Current Text= | ||
− | + | Per http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/legalfaq#DTD, paragraph 5.10: | |
+ | |||
+ | <pre>Schemas (and DTDs) are frequently part of our specifications and seemingly fall under | ||
+ | the document copyright terms. However, as long as you do not use the same formal namespace | ||
+ | or public identifier to identify that modified OGC schema/DTD (which might confuse | ||
+ | applications), you may treat the schema/DTD under the software terms. This means that you | ||
+ | are permitted to make a derivative or modified OGC schema/DTD, but even under the software | ||
+ | terms you are obligated to include/retain the OGC copyright notice. We further appreciate a | ||
+ | couple sentences regarding who made the modifications, when, and what changes were made in | ||
+ | the original DTD -- a common software documentation practice.</pre> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Document terms: http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/document | ||
+ | Software terms: http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/software | ||
=Proposed Text= | =Proposed Text= | ||
+ | |||
+ | <pre>TBD</pre> |
Revision as of 12:12, 16 February 2015
Background
Blogpost: http://www.how2map.com/2015/02/a-good-test-for-ogc-and-osgeo.html
Discussion on OSGeo-Standards mailing list: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/OGC-XML-schemas-and-FOSS4G-software-distribution-td5186023.html
This issue is not new, however was raised in the OSGeo Standards mailing list as a result of the pycsw Incubation process
Problem Statement
FOSS4G software may encounter distribution issues when including OGC Schemas as part of the codebase.
Use of OGC XML Schemas in FOSS4G Implementations
- used to re-publish schemas:
- XML responses cite
xsi:schemaLocation
of pointing to locally cached OGC schemas- e.g.
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.opengis.net/cat/csw/2.0.2 http://HOST/csw/2.0.2/CSW-discovery.xsd">
- e.g.
- XML responses cite
- used within software to perform XML schema validity of XML based HTTP requests
- others?
Distribution
Debian
Examples of rejection by Debian:
- pycsw: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-November/024520.html
- TinyOWS: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-grass-devel/2014-January/017321.html
Current Text
Per http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/legalfaq#DTD, paragraph 5.10:
Schemas (and DTDs) are frequently part of our specifications and seemingly fall under the document copyright terms. However, as long as you do not use the same formal namespace or public identifier to identify that modified OGC schema/DTD (which might confuse applications), you may treat the schema/DTD under the software terms. This means that you are permitted to make a derivative or modified OGC schema/DTD, but even under the software terms you are obligated to include/retain the OGC copyright notice. We further appreciate a couple sentences regarding who made the modifications, when, and what changes were made in the original DTD -- a common software documentation practice.
Document terms: http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/document Software terms: http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/software
Proposed Text
TBD