[od-discuss] [okfn-discuss] Open Definition 2.1 final draft
Aaron Wolf
wolftune at riseup.net
Mon Jul 27 17:20:35 UTC 2015
Honestly, I would like the people focusing on data to work a little
harder to understand the big picture and not just be data-centric.
We need them to answer whether "as a whole" is inadequate and otherwise
to figure out how to express their concern in a way that is more
generalized.
Perhaps "as a whole, including any bulk data" … but I don't really know.
-Aaron
On 07/27/2015 01:15 PM, Herb Lainchbury wrote:
> As Stephen Gates explains here
> <https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/issues/68> , 2.1 the "bulk"
> requirement is now a *must*. We use the words "as a whole" rather than
> "bulk" so, 2.1 starts of as:
>
> "The work must be provided as a whole and..."
>
> We could instead say something like:
>
> "The work must be provided in bulk and..."
>
> but "bulk" seems to me like data specific jargon so seems a bit out of
> place to me used with "The work".
>
> I think the question to ask is - does "as a whole" sufficiently convey
> what we mean here? If so, then I think 2.1 stands as is. If not, then
> let's tweak it so it does explicitly convey what we want.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org
> <mailto:rufus.pollock at okfn.org>> wrote:
>
> I'm also +1 on a strong explicit bulk statement.
>
> On 19 July 2015 at 21:58, Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou <b.ooghe at gmail.com
> <mailto:b.ooghe at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Herb and everyone, and thanks a lot for the mailing-list notice.
>
> I seem to have missed the latest updates regarding 1.3 and I'm only
> catching up now which I feel a bit guilty about... :/
>
> I've been exploring all the latest commits and I'm worried the
> successive changes have lost in the way both references to bulk
> access
> (which was indeed moved to 1.2, but then removed as redundant
> with "as
> a whole"), and to machine-readability (which makes me feel like
> current 1.3 could make now pdf acceptable for data for instance)
>
> In exchange we got this final sentence that sounds a bit unclear and
> blurred to me : "The work should be provided in the form
> preferred for
> making modifications to it."
>
> Although I understand we want to go forward a more global
> opendefinition than one adressing only data, I feel like it will
> still
> be one of the reference documents for data and should then still
> have
> clear precisions regarding them.
>
> So with this in mind, I feel like one of the previous formulation of
> Art 1.3 in the rewriting process was a lot more clear and adressing
> this matter of expliciting specifically for data these two required
> features : "Data must be machine-readable and should be provided in
> bulk."
> (cf this version
> https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/blob/2766b3fd209799993d5ada55a3e7ac92a5d1115c/source/open-definition-2.1-dev.markdown#13-open-format
> )
>
>
> Benjamin Ooghe-Tabanou
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Herb Lainchbury
> <herb.lainchbury at gmail.com <mailto:herb.lainchbury at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> > After further discussion, consideration and much input from various people
> > in the community I think we're ready to consider the current Open Definition
> > draft 2.1 dev for acceptance.
> >
> > You can find the current draft 2.1 dev version here:
> > https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/blob/master/source/open-definition-2.1-dev.markdown
> >
> > The actual diff can be viewed here: http://git.io/vm6W8
> > (note: this diff includes all changes to the repository so use the "Files
> > Changed" tab to see just the changes to the
> > "source/open-definition-2.1-dev.markdown" file.
> >
> > The main discussions centred around the preamble as well as clauses 1.3,
> > 2.2.3, 2.2.5 and 2.2.6.
> >
> > Most of the issues addressed are also documented here:
> > https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=label%3A2.1
> >
> >
> > Please pay particular attention to 1.3 in your review as that clause was one
> > of the main reasons for this update and we want to ensure it is as good as
> > we can make it. See discussions here and here and here.
> >
> > An attribution clause has also been added to the definition to
> recognize the
> > work the definition is based on.
> >
> >
> > Please submit any further comments on the od-discuss list.
> >
> > Please take this opportunity to raise any final objections to
> voting on
> > final acceptance of this draft. If no objections are received
> I will call
> > for a vote in approximately one week.
> >
> >
> > Please disseminate this note further as you see fit and if you
> know of
> > another list that we should notify, please let me know.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Herb Lainchbury
> > Chair, Open Definition Advisory Council
> >
> > ----------
> >
> > In summary, the changes from 2.0 to the current 2.1dev are:
> >
> > Preamble
> >
> > - reference to OSD changed to wikipedia
> >
> > - change to summary section to simplify and improve clarity of
> the term
> > **license**
> >
> >
> > 1.
> >
> > - fixed formatting typo
> >
> >
> > 1.2
> >
> > - from shall to must and from preferable to should
> >
> >
> > 1.3
> >
> > - from "or" to "and"
> >
> > - from "processed" to "fully processed"
> >
> > - removed bulk suggestion - already covered in 1.2
> >
> > - added *should* be provided in form preferred for making
> modifications to
> > it
> >
> >
> > 2.
> >
> > - added “should be compatible”
> >
> > - fixed formatting typo
> >
> > 2.2
> >
> > - changed shall to must
> >
> > 2.2.1
> >
> > - added missing comma
> >
> > 2.2.3
> >
> > -The **license** *may* require copies or derivatives of a
> licensed work to
> > remain under a license the same as or similar to the original.
> >
> > +The **license** *may* require distributions of the work to
> remain under the
> > same license or a similar license.
> >
> > 2.2.5
> >
> > -The **license** *may* require modified works to be made
> available in a form
> > preferred for further modification.
> >
> > +The **license** *may* require that anyone distributing the
> work provide
> > recipients with access to the preferred form for making
> modifications.
> >
> >
> > 2.2.6
> >
> > -The **license** *may* prohibit distribution of the work in a
> manner where
> > technical measures impose restrictions on the exercise of
> otherwise allowed
> > rights.
> >
> > +The **license** *may* require that distributions of the work
> remain free of
> > any technical measures that would restrict the exercise of
> otherwise allowed
> > rights.
> >
> >
> >
> > Attribution
> > +The Open Definition was initially derived from the Open
> Source Definition,
> > which in turn was derived from the original Debian Free
> Software Guidelines,
> > and the Debian Social Contract of which they are a part, which
> were created
> > by Bruce Perens and the Debian Developers. Bruce later used
> the same text in
> > creating the Open Source Definition. This definition is
> substantially
> > derivative of those documents and retains their essential
> principles.
> > Richard Stallman was the first to push the ideals of software
> freedom which
> > we continue.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Herb
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org <mailto:okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> *
>
> **
>
> ****
>
> **Rufus Pollock**
>
> **Founder and President | skype: rufuspollock | @rufuspollock
> <https://twitter.com/rufuspollock>**
>
> **Open Knowledge <http://okfn.org/>- s**ee how data can change the world
>
> ****http://okfn.org/| @okfn <http://twitter.com/OKFN>| Open
> Knowledge on Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/OKFNetwork>| Blog
> <http://blog.okfn.org/>***
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Herb
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
More information about the od-discuss
mailing list