SAX2: Which license?

[David Megginson]

When I released SAX 1.0 nearly two years ago, I explicitly put it into
the public domain rather than using an open-source license -- the idea
was to rely on peer-pressure rather than legal recourse to ensure the
integrity of SAX, and to avoid even the suggestion that I might try to
restrict SAX in any way to try to make money from it.

As we move to SAX2, I was wondering what licensing we should use?  Is
public domain still OK?  It is *very* important to me, at least, that
SAX's license be as friendly as possible to commercial software
developers, so the GPL is out (though the LGPL might be OK).  MPL
looks pretty good as well.  I'm not much of a licensing wonk, though,
and would be grateful for advice from those who have spent more time
thinking about this kind of thing.

I'll send a private note to Eric Raymond as well -- most of the
open-source movement has been concerned with licensing software, not
interfaces, and I'll be interested to hear what he thinks.


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)