W3C license

[Rodent of Unusual Size]

"Matthew C. Weigel" wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> 
> > "This has the beneficial effect of making it harder to create Yet
> > Another open source license."
> 
> To address that statement in particular, it was reducing the
> workload placed uon the volunteers of the OSI that had this
> particular benefit.

See below.

> Realistically, paring down the number of submissions is as
> necessary as paring down the number of approvals.

Given the current process, that is most likely true.  But since
I do not believe the current process is as good as it could be,
I do not consider that truth to be an absolute one.

Possible improvement #1: if the load is too much for the
current volunteer base.. get more volunteers.

Problem: 'We cannot squeeze this many data through this wire.'
Current solution: 'Do not try; send fewer data.'
Alternate solution: 'Get a bigger wire.'
Other alternates are possible.

> Presumably, a license which does something new and interesting
> will either a) have someone who already put in the time to develop
> this new and different license, and is clearly motivated, or
> b) get a tenacious third party sufficiently interested to do
> the work.

Um, judging from the threads of the last fortnight, that just
ain't happening with the current model.  It sounds as though
there are several motivated people, but the task they have been
assigned is Sisyphean.  It is not due to their lack of motivation
that the licences in question are not being approved, nor to
duplication of existing approved ones, but apparently to the
inertia and other problems of the current process.
-- 
#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"All right everyone!  Step away from the glowing hamburger!"
--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3