What we've been looking at in software

[Twin Rose]

I really, really don't mean this to sound offensive, but Andy, If your an intern how can any opinion you give be taken with any weight?

By definition your employment is not long term. Is the information your giving handed down from people above you? If this is the offical position of the company. Why is it posted here and not on WOTC boards?

Don't get me wrong, I know this topic was opened to foster positive growth, but I have to wonder this is the correct way of doing this.

Because he's the intern that everyone talks about when they say, "We have an intern working on it..." He does a lot of the brunt work, and certainly deserves the respect of the community. Think of him as a triage nurse - things come to him, and he decides which of them is worthy of note to go to the 'next level'.

 

[Jay Lofstead]

I wish to reiterate the need of respect for Andy's opinion. Please remember that he is the one that is validating compliance. WotC has presumably trained him with what to look for and is so far trusting his work for determining compliance.

Look at it practically, if Andy is happy that what you have done is compliant, you are compliant (at least until there are changes to interpretations). If he is not, then you are not likely to be branded as compliant. He is the law.

 

[herald]

I'm not trying to disrespect Andy. And let me go as far as to say thank you Andy for taking time to address the issues that you have.

But I do not think that it is unfair of me to ask just how it is that Andy came to be in his position and how far does his authority extends. I some how doubt that he is the "Law". But I could accept that he is the "Authority".

Given the current state of game related aids and 3e and the current issues with e-tools, I and many others would like to know that when we hear a quote coming out of WOTC that the individuals actually have the clout on which they speak. Since this is the very first time I have heard of "Andy", I don't think that an introduction is unfair.

 

[Twin Rose]

I'm not trying to disrespect Andy. And let me go as far as to say thank you Andy for taking time to address the issues that you have.

But I do not think that it is unfair of me to ask just how it is that Andy came to be in his position and how far does his authority extends. I some how doubt that he is the "Law". But I could accept that he is the "Authority".

Given the current state of game related aids and 3e and the current issues with e-tools, I and many others would like to know that when we hear a quote coming out of WOTC that the individuals actually have the clout on which they speak. Since this is the very first time I have heard of "Andy", I don't think that an introduction is unfair.

I think it's safe to say that if an employee of any company posts something that sounds like an official statement, and signs it with the companies name, that they are acting in an official capacity.

 

[smetzger]

The issue with releasing a binary (be it an executable, an dll, ocx, or whatever) is usually from using code that's not your own. So it's not an issue of the compiler, but what code you're using (ever write an MFC application?). One could write a binary, that's ogl compliant, as the standards and interfaces for these file types aren't subject to licensing. But perhaps, on a Windows box, you inherited your main gui from CWnd. Usually you're free to use the code for whatever you want, but releasing it under another license may not be possible, I just don't know.

People release windows code "under another license" everyday. The license is usually a EULA, in our case it would be the d20 and/or OGL. I do not see any license issues with straight windows code. There may be some with database drivers and using the XML capabilities of IE or 3rd party libraries, but these would all be rather specific cases.

 

[Jay Lofstead]

I concede I forgot to put in a smiley about Andy being "The Law". I guess the Judge Dredd reference just seemed too obvious to me. As Chris wrote, he did write speaking in an official capacity as a representative of the company (seemingly based on our request). I'd still trust his opinion over almost anyone else's as long as he is in that position.

 

[dvvega]

First off, thank you Andy (he of the vital internship that does the work for the great management).

This thread has been most helpful in clearing up a couple of questions I posted on the boards about a fortnight ago.

However one thing still remains to be answered ...

I understand the OGL, and what it is trying to accomplish, however the wording of the "interaction" clause is the one I'm most interested in.

Yes, they want to stop people developing computer games based on d20, and this is 100% understandable. However, the whole thing about interaction ... I'm a DM, and I use my computer to run my game ... as such I like the machine to take care of a lot of grunt work ...

... now if it was to automatically roll attack rolls for my monsters, compare against a PCs AC and then roll damage, it breaks the interaction clause.

... if I roll my own dice and input the results into the machine, it still breaks the interaction clause (since it's working things out via human input).

Is the spirit of the OGL just about computer games? Or will it be left as is and essentially make anything actually useful like a combat organiser not allowed to be shared amongst fellow gamers?

 

[Twin Rose]

First off, thank you Andy (he of the vital internship that does the work for the great management).

This thread has been most helpful in clearing up a couple of questions I posted on the boards about a fortnight ago.

However one thing still remains to be answered ...

I understand the OGL, and what it is trying to accomplish, however the wording of the "interaction" clause is the one I'm most interested in.

Yes, they want to stop people developing computer games based on d20, and this is 100% understandable. However, the whole thing about interaction ... I'm a DM, and I use my computer to run my game ... as such I like the machine to take care of a lot of grunt work ...

... now if it was to automatically roll attack rolls for my monsters, compare against a PCs AC and then roll damage, it breaks the interaction clause.

... if I roll my own dice and input the results into the machine, it still breaks the interaction clause (since it's working things out via human input).

Is the spirit of the OGL just about computer games? Or will it be left as is and essentially make anything actually useful like a combat organiser not allowed to be shared amongst fellow gamers?

The OGL doesn't have an interaction clause.

The d20 STL does.

 

[dvvega]

Sorry, I actually meant the STL ... but all this OGL talk confused me ... but essentially my question stands in the spirit of its asking ...

And by your response, it would imply that to be OGL and can do all the interactive stuff, roll dice via a machine, automatically calculate what happens based on those dice, etc.

 

[Fractalwave]

Since this is the very first time I have heard of "Andy", I don't think that an introduction is unfair.

The reason most have not heard of Andy is because people who have written programs have been talking to him directly and keeping him too busy to come out from his closet where he hides with his computer. We just let him up for air this week before he keeled over from exhaustion.

Really, if you've needed to know who Andy is then you have known him. If not, then you didn't. There was no big secret or anything. Just work to do.