Open-source licensing (was: XLink library)

John Cowan cowan at
Thu Nov 12 20:02:19 GMT 1998

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

> The library is and will be open source, though at this point I haven't
> firmly decided on a license. (GPL is likely, in some slightly modified
> form.)

I suggest that you avoid the GPL for components, as GPLed components
can only be used to build GPLed applications.  Alternatives are:

	the LGPL at;
	the MPL at;
	the BSD license (aka "James Clark" license)
	the public domain.

I favor the last two options for large and small components

For information and texts, see .

Also note that modified versions of the GPL are *forbidden* by its
own copyright notice: the GPL is not itself under the GPL, but
under a license that says "anyone may copy, but changes are forbidden."
That is to prevent the proliferation of minutely different versions
of the GPL.

John Cowan		cowan at
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as:
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list