[od-discuss] v2.0 dev section 1 review

Thu Mar 6 21:25:06 UTC 2014

I have updated v2.0 dev as per our most recent discussion.

# Goals
As I mentioned on that call I think the principle goal of v2 is to simply
make it easier to determine conformance of licenses by separating those
clauses that deal with license issues from those that deal with the
application of those licenses to works.

A secondary goal is to reorient the phrasing of some of the conformance
conditions so that they talk about what MUST be true about the license as
opposed to what MUST NOT be true.  A subtle change but one which we think
will determination simpler.

Finally, anything else that makes the process of conformance determination
simpler, while retaining the meaning - for example, removal of redundancies.

Several suggestions for new conditions and recommendations have been made
for possible inclusion in v2.  I recommend we first deal with meeting the
above goals with an aim to not changing the actual meaning of the
definition in this next release.  Once we accomplish that, then I am all
for entertaining additions / modifications in subsequent releases.

I think this will be easier for us to accomplish in a shorter period of
time.

To that end I have edited the draft document which can be found here:
https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/blob/master/source/open-definition-dev.markdown

Highlights of my changes are:
* intro and terms are pre-ample as in v1
* renamed headers as per discussion last meeting and prior meeting
* the conditions are broken into two sections: section 1 of the document
now relates to licenses and section 2 to works
* section 1 has two subsections.  1.1 deals with conditions licenses must
meet, while 1.2 deals with allowable conditions that licenses may require
* removed (almost - see next two points) all *new* suggestions which we can
consider after the next release (v2.0).  If you think I have removed
something that is not new please speak up.
* one *new* item is 2.1.1 which links the works to the licenses - which is
needed, so it's not being removed.
* another *new* item is a specific share-alike allowable condition
* commented remaining clauses to show their origin
* leaving other comments in place for now
* have not modified section 2 text (other than headings) because Andrew is
reviewing it separately

Specific points / requests for feedback to note:
* please review headings and see if they make sense.  trying to keep them
short (one word if possible).
* with the new reorientation of some of the clauses, 1.1.8 now seems
redundant to me.  1.1.1 and 1.1.6 seem to me to cover everything in the
first line of 1.1.8.  I have removed the second line of the prior 1.1.8 as
I believe it's new material - please correct me if I'm wrong on this)
* with respect to the remaining clauses - ideally the clauses would be self
explanatory and thus would not require additional comments as some do now.
 I don't know if we can achieve that in this release so I have left the
remaining ones in for a round of discussion.
* we talk about two allowable conditions in the summary statement (at most
attribution and share-alike) but right now there appear to be three, the
third being 1.2.1 Integrity.  Not sure if anything needs to be done with
this or not but it seems it could be tidier.

Thanks,
Herb
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20140306/c147daae/attachment-0002.html>