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

Tue Jul 28 21:05:04 UTC 2015

Hi

Perhaps it would be useful to be specific about "machine readable" in
respect of data but expressly state that this specificity flows from  the
general principle in 1.3
"The work *should* be provided in the form preferred for working with and
making modifications to it"  or whatever the final wording is agree.
Additional wording would then stipulate: "When a work consists of or
contains data then the preferred form for that data is a form that enables
a recipient use automated processes to use or modify the data as a whole or
in part."

This would help by showing how the principle would be applied to one kind
of knowledge.

Of course automated processes like machine readable requires some
refinement - algorithmic processes perhaps?

Andrew

Andrew Rens

On 28 July 2015 at 15:59, Aaron Wolf <wolftune at riseup.net> wrote:

>
>
> On 07/28/2015 03:44 PM, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
> > 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')
> >
>
> I am willing to consent to others' concerns, but I'm with Mike: 'should
> be provided in the form preferred for making modifications to it' — in
> principle, that means you have data you can actually use, i.e.
> machine-readable if that's the way you would usually manage the data.
>
> But, I could see changing 'making modifications' to 'working with and
> modifying' — working with data may be analyzing it but not modifying the
> data. So, to do analysis, you'd want it to be machine-readable, but this
> is independent of modifying the data.
>
> So, I think we need to have a better generalized wording here.
>
> I suggest 'provided in the form preferred for working with and making
> modifications to it'
>
> My concern here is about the "must" vs "should" aspect: If we used
> "must" would that say that my video is not "open" unless I provide all
> the source files? I have mixed feelings about that but certainly don't
> want it any stronger than "available upon request". We don't want to
> block the distribution of videos by making *all* distributions
> necessarily include all source files.
>
>
> > - 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)
> >
>
> I had this same concern about "machine-readability", but I thought
> qualifying this as data-specific would be acceptable. But I'm not sure.
>
>
> > Mike
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20150728/33af17e8/attachment-0003.html>