[od-discuss] Open Definition 2.1 vote

Wed Aug 26 16:06:52 UTC 2015

I'm almost + 1 but I want a couple clarifications, think maybe we should really fix these last things. Basically, I would *greatly* prefer a stage in which we say "vote on this as release-candidate" or something where we are saying no more content changes really, but we'll still fix up grammatical issues and minor items etc. — I want us to all agree that the content is fine without that same statement making the precise text absolutely final.

A final review brought up some questions that I want clarified or fixed before I'll be +1 and I hope others will appreciate my concerns enough to delay their support with me to address these final items.

I submitted a new PR just now for a grammar fix (not a content change).

I somehow missed that in https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/commit/22a12d029a22f09310b7e38b120c712fcc6f19b1#diff-43c1b84a0e962cadb0bc57de43de4d23 we added to 2.0:

"A **license** *should* be compatible with other open licenses."

The use of the article "a" here in "a license" strikes me as *very* odd.

Side note: I'm mildly disappointed that my question about removing "individual" from the term "individual elements" in 1.3 didn't get noticed or get any replies or anything.

In 2.1.3, "such derivatives under the same terms of the original licensed work" should that not be "such derivatives under the same terms as the original licensed work" (of -> as) ?

In 2.1.4 "All parties who receive any distribution of any part of a work within the terms of the original license /should/ have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original work."

Why is this a should?? For that matter, this whole second sentence seems extraneous and picky given the existence of 2.1.7

Finally, I hope, as discussed in the issues around v2 that a supportive vote from the OD list on a final version means specifically that we present it as a "release candidate" to the larger OK community and absolutely *not* as a finalized set-in-stone decision. I don't want us to accept any final wording without having done the work of getting the larger community to have a chance to read the proposed release candidate.

Cheers,
Aaron

On 08/26/2015 08:43 AM, Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
> +1
>
> And many thanks to Herb and other colleagues for seeing this through. I
> like the wording of 1.3 and 1.4 and think they read easily and clearly.
>
> I know how much effort it is to have to return again and again under the
> final version works.
>
> The Open Definition and its process is one of the glories of the OKF
> (aka OK). It's a model for something that is critically useful, boring
> for 99% of people, but really important. Every time I hear "openwashed"
> permissions (as in "Open Access") I quote the OD at them.
>
> It has magic powers.
>
> P.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Herb Lainchbury
> <herb.lainchbury at gmail.com <mailto:herb.lainchbury at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     It is time to vote.  We now have a final version 2.1 of the Open
>     Definition.
>
>     Much appreciation to all who participated in the various discussions
>     and meetings over the past several months.  Thank you!
>
>     The current final draft can be found here:
>     https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/blob/gh-pages/source/open-definition-2.1-dev.markdown
>
>     At this time I am asking all advisory council members to vote to
>     approve the current v2.1 dev for release and general use.
>
>     Please indicate your approval of this current final draft to become
>     the new standard by replying to the list with a +1.  Please indicate
>     your dissent replying to the list with a -1.
>
>     Votes will be accepted for one week until end of day Wednesday
>     September 2, 2015.
>
>     Thank you,
>     Herb Lainchbury
>     Chair, Open Definition Advisory Council
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     od-discuss mailing list
>     od-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:od-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>     https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
>     Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Peter Murray-Rust
> Reader in Molecular Informatics
> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
> University of Cambridge
> CB2 1EW, UK
> +44-1223-763069
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> od-discuss mailing list
> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>

-- 
Aaron Wolf
co-founder, Snowdrift.coop
music teacher, wolftune.com