License should use SPDX identifiers

[mr-c]

https://spdx.org/licenses/

https://github.com/common-workflow-language/user_guide/edit/gh-pages/_extras/recommended-practices.md

[tobyhodges]

You mean, this is how an author should refer to a license within the metadata of a CWL file/description?

[mr-c]

Yes, previously we recommend using a URL to a copy of the license. Now we should recommend using an SPDX URI if available, falling back to the old advice for non-standard licenses.

[tobyhodges]

Ok, PR coming soon

[tobyhodges]

do you have an example of SPDX id usage to hand? I'd like to keep a link to an example if possible. No worries if you can't provide one easily - I will track one down

[tobyhodges]

or actually, I can't! Perhaps I can include an example instead of linking to one?

[mr-c]

https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-2.0 (leave off the .html)

[mr-c]

Formula is: short identifer from the list at https://spdx.org/licenses/ appended to https://spdx.org/licenses/

[tetron]

The recommend metadata should look like this:

$namespaces:
  s: http://schema.org/
  spdx: https://spdx.org/licenses/
s:license: spdx:Apache-2.0 

[mr-c]

@tetron Sure, though if we are only using a namespace once then we don't have to define the namespace

So for most CWL files that could be:

$namespaces:
  s: http://schema.org/
s:license: https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-2.0 
# other s: declarations