New FSB branding model

[Forrest J Cavalier III]

> You should just be using URIs (or even URNs) for the license file.  Don't use a
> hash because this can change if you license file changes (think whitespace).
> 
> Just use urns... urn:gpl or urn:lgpl should be fine.
> 

That was considered.

There is no central authority for assigning URNs.  Many
licenses are already available and freely distributable, and
it is hoped that those are used instead of re-created.  But
in the LIDESC open architecture, anyone can create a new
stamp and description file without going through a central
authority.

LIDESC stamps already include a urn-like item: the name of
the license text file.  Because there is also a hash code, 
LIDESC can search a list of directories for a file which
matches in name AND hash code.  So even if there is a collision
in file name, LIDESC still identifies the right license.

As for whitespace, \r is removed when calculating the hash code,
but there are some contrived cases where differences in
whitespace have legal significance.  Consider indenting whitespace
when there is a phrase like "You must place the following notice..."
followed by an indented copyright notice, and then a warranty
disclaimer, not indented.

Did I fully reply to the issues you raise?

Forrest



--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3