SAX C/C++ Implementations?

[David Megginson]

<mlepage at antimeta.com> writes:

> My understanding is, if you use GPL source without GPLing your code,
> you are in violation of the license. You can, however, use a GPL'd
> program, provided you don't link to it, and you provide the
> source. It is the LGPL that allows you to link to the library. I am
> not aware of any way to use GPL'd source without GPLing your own
> source, save not releasing at all.

True, but the preferred license for Expat is MPL, which doesn't impose 
this restriction; to quote:

3.7. Larger Works. 
    You may create a Larger Work by combining Covered Code with other
    code not governed by the terms of this License and distribute the
    Larger Work as a single product. In such a case, You must make
    sure the requirements of this License are fulfilled for the
    Covered Code.

It probably would have made sense to allow LGPL rather than GPL as the 
alternative license, but there may have been issues that we don't know 
about.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)