[od-discuss] [okfn-discuss] Open Definition 2.1 final draft

Tue Jul 28 19:44:05 UTC 2015

On 07/28/2015 10:21 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 07/28/2015 01:07 PM, Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou wrote:
>> Yes I agree also that the "as a whole" is fine regarding "bulk"
>>
>> As Rufus pointed out my main concern left is on machine-readability.
>> Aaron I understand we want the OD to handle a larger picture than just
>> data, but since it has historically been used primarily for data, I
>> just want to make sure we can keep doing it afterwards and do not lose
>> actual specific requirements.
>> That's I why I proposed to simply replace the blurred "in a form
>> preferred" sentenced with a sentence precising the specific case of
>> data as It was agreed on earlier in the process.
>> As such, 1.3 first concerns "work" globally. Having at the end a "Data
>> must be machine readable" would add the proper precision.
>>
>> Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou
>>
>>
> 
> Adding "Data must be machine readable" to the end of 1.3 sounds fine to
> me. Let's do that.

Looks like superfluous jargon to me:

- the underlying issue of works being provided in a manner that the work
in question can be easily processed and manipulated is not specific to
data (even from a data-centric worldview, eg to mine data from 'content')

- machine-readability is not defined (with respect to what? eg a bitmap
image is read by a machine, even if it is encodes a scan of 'data' from
a printout)

Mike