[akavel]

I'm somewhat confused: the "Related" section says:

"[...] that motivated me to rewrite it [- presumably: svgbob -] in JS (svgbob is written in rust)" [...]"

So, is "Typograms" a modified rewrite of svgbob in JS? IF yes, isn't it a Derivative Work of svgbob, and (per the Apache License, which seems to match the one used here) shouldn't "Typograms" keep the mention of the original author somewhere in the Licensing information, and notably their original Copyright note? (As present e.g. in svgbob's License file.)

IF NOT, then why mention a "rewrite"? What is actual relation of Typograms to svgbob? This becomes even weirder given that some of the examples in the Typograms demo seem reused verbatim from the svgbob demo - but rendered poorer (at least on Firefox); making it sound like it is a rewrite also makes it sound like it is a - sorry for this - crappy rewrite... and this under google's name... but then in the end is it actually not a rewrite? is it just a - still at first glance seemingly crappy, sorry - clone? (hm, at least I'd love to show some clearly highlighted improvements over svgbob, maybe? if I'm not to focus on the somewhat-broken parts of the demo?) aaaand still under google's name?... reeeeaaaaaallllyyyyy wierd and confusing case to me... (O_o)

[paxys]

A rewrite is NOT a derivative work, as long as it is only copying the interfaces and not original code.

[kazinator]

An implementation by someone not involved in the original, and not using the original code, is not usually called a rewrite. The authors of this should use more careful language.

If the same author wrote one version and then another, and only a minority of the code (if any) is shared between the two, it's a rewrite. Especially if the new thing is intended to replace the old.

If one employee at an organization produced the first version of something, and another one at the same organization produces the second, using very little of the original code, that's also rewrite. The organization is doing a rewrite, even though that second employee is writing it for the first time.

Someone not connected to the original who knows only the interfaces, or inputs and outputs, isn't doing a rewrite; they are "cloning" or "implementing" and such.

[akavel]

Hmm, IANAL, though I seem to believe there tends to be a question of "have you seen the original code before writing your clone" - which presumes that you still risk copying some code - or are you doing a "cleanroom reimplementation" without ever at all seeing the original code, just basing purely on a specification of the original, ideally written by someone else. As long as it's not pristine cleanroom, I think it's potentially murky territory.

[sgoto]

Done, merged a patch to clarify that it is absolutely the latter: this is an implementation from scratch with completely different rendering passes, design and SVG output structures.

Does that help?

https://github.com/google/typograms/commit/bdd329eaec7497b96...

[akavel]

It does, thanks! <3