[od-discuss] Provincial and Game OGLs; Open Definition 2.0

[Herb Lainchbury]

"treat OGL BC as a template license, and say anything that merely replaces
the name is open"


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Mike Linksvayer <ml at gondwanaland.com> wrote:

For example, we could choose to treat OGL BC as a template license, and say
> anything that merely replaces the name is open; up to users of the
> eventually hundreds of licenses from that template to verify statement
> about no other changes is true or not.
>

Interesting idea.  Even many publishers have not parametrized their
license, we could provide the shortcut to a decision based on whether it's
simply a name change.



>
> Feels like splitting hairs. Net is, I'd prefer to just wait on conformance
> votes for all vanity licenses until we have OD 2.0.
>

Could be.  I'm +1 on waiting.

Herb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20131105/462ed6e5/attachment-0001.html>