Gary O'Neall
Gary O'Neall
I added issue #537 to propose a change to the SPDX 3.0 model to support annotation Elements outside of the Document
> is this an issue for RDF also, or just for JSON? I had to think about this question a while - I believe the answer is no - it...
I just looked back through the relationship definitions and I agree with needing to add additional relationships to cover these uses cases. I like IMPLEMENTATION_OF for use case 2. I...
@swinslow Since I suggested to @mxmehl a profile, I thought I would add an opinion. We have done a "minus" type profile with the SPDX-Lite proposal from the Asia group,...
From the SPDX tech call on 27 April 2021: * In general good support for this proposal * General consensus that we would prefer license information to be as close...
@zvr @mxmehl @kestewart I'm thinking if we get a PR within the next week, we can review and potentially include it in the 2.3 release. Let me know if you...
@mxmehl Looking back through the thread, it looks like adding a separate "Annex" (previously called Appendix) would be the approach for adding to the spec. Format could be similar to...
@rjb4standards I'm going to move this over to the SPDX spec repo. We ran into a similar request related to use in ID's for container use cases. The main reason...
> the real problem is I don't control what a vendor may put in their Filename OK - I understand the issue now. > Would it be possible to adapt...
Moving this issue to 3.0 since it may have compatibility implications