RE: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)

Joel

Yes, I referred to that list when I quoted "classical programming code".

However, as the list does not include a set of recognized programming languages,
I thought that the issue was left open.

By code marker I assume you mean <CODE BEGINS> ... <CODE ENDS>,
which is itself a kind of pseudocode.

Y(J)S

-----Original Message-----
From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:jmh@joelhalpern.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 19:13
To: Yaakov Stein
Cc: Marshall Eubanks; ietf list; IAB IAB; IESG; Trustees
Subject: Re: Proposed Revisions to the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP)

There is an explicit list of what is automatically covered as code.
After discussion, that list does not (did not, the last time I checked) 
include pseudo-code.
Document authors are free to mark their pseudo-code using the code 
marker if they want it treated as code.

The problem, as far as I am concerned, is that pseudo-code is not 
well-defined, and therefore including it in the general list, we would 
have ambiguity as to what was or was not covered.

Yours,
Joel

Yaakov Stein wrote:
> Could you change the wording "BSD License" to "revised BSD License"
> to avoid confusion with the "original BSD license"
> that contained the infamous "advertising clause" ?
> 
> Is pseudocode covered by the terms of redistribution of source code in section 4 ?
> The last line of the list of code component types is "classical programming code".
> Does this imply a requirement that the code can be parsed by some means ?
> 
> Y(J)S
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 