separate "inline" documentation license

[xenoterracide]

I would like to provide a separate, but inline license for my "inline documentation". ugh, I used inline twice there wanting better words.

what do I mean by inline documentation? I'm referring to documentation such as javadoc, or pod which lives next to the code, usually in a comment like format.

what do I mean by inline license? I mean that the license is bundled with the documentation like a comment, and also visible on rendered versions of the document, such as a converted version of javadoc to html.

an outlier to this is documenting the source code of markup language separately from the content in the markup language.

My understanding is that SPDX currently does not have a standard for this. I would think that the standard would essentially be putting it in the "comment" that is recognized as output. For the markup, it should just be a way to recognize updating something that is rendered. Really that's the truth for both cases, just to write to something that is rendered. Probably the biggest thing here is a way to recognize and update a year in these documents.

You could allow for a keyword "replace" and mode

Copyright © and then replace that if not found using the standard SPDX header with Copyright © {year} - {year} {copyright}, or something like that, I imagine most would not want a non pretty variant... I'm somewhat indifferent. It might also be possible to just detect format and add as a "footer" in many cases as per usual.

motivation: I might want my code to be AGPL-3.0, but there's no reason to be that restrictive on documentation sharing so licensing as CC-BY-NC-4.0 might be satisfactory.