Inconsistencies wrt relative paths in `referenced_filenames`

[armijnhemel]

Description

This isn't so much a bug report as more of a question. I can see that in certain rule files there are relative paths in the license text, but in referenced_filenames it is inconsistent. Sometimes referenced_filenames includes the relative component (such as ..), other times it doesn't.

An example is mit_1356.RULE:

---
license_expression: mit
relevance: 100
is_license_reference: yes
referenced_filenames:
    - LICENSE
---

{{licensed under MIT}}, see ../LICENSE

while in apache-2.0_1122.RULE:

---
license_expression: apache-2.0
is_license_notice: yes
relevance: 100
referenced_filenames:
    - ../../../LICENSE
---

## License

This code is licensed under {{Apache-2.0 }}(../../../LICENSE).

I could not find any guidance in the documentation about what the correct way is.