Move Licensing requirement to conformance section
Opened this issue · 1 comments
The Licensing profile states that:
If the hasConcludedLicense for a Software Artifact is not the same as its hasDeclaredLicense, a written explanation SHOULD be provided in the hasConcludedLicense relationship comment field.
This should moved into the compliance section.
In addition, I suggest to include something like this in the compliance section:
A SoftwareArtifact with a hasDeclaredLicense relationship to a
NoneLicenseorNoAssertionLicenseshould not link to any declared license.
A SoftwareArtifact with a hasConcludedLicense relationship to aNoneLicenseorNoAssertionLicenseshould not link to any concluded license.
Agree with moving this to the conformance section.
The additions need to be discussed - I'm not sure I agree with the proposed language. It's a bit complex, so having a discussion on the topic may help.
Ping @swinslow
Suggest we do this in 3.1 since (at least today) it is documentation.