[okfn-discuss] Open Software Service Definition

[Dave Crossland]

2008/9/4 Thorsten Glaser <tg at mirbsd.de>:
> Dave Crossland dixit:
>
>>Since the OSSD definition says "OSI boolean-AND FSF approved licenses"
>>this isn't an issue.
>
> This is, since AND means it must be approved by both. The natural
> language "and/or" would be what you want, I think.

Hahaha yes you are quite right. How silly of me.

Hmm.

The problem with boolean-OR for the lists is that it means the FSF
doesn't trust it, because its includes non-free licenses.

> Maybe point to the OSI list, but add a list of "should be in the OSI list"
> licences to an explanatory page?

Okay, again: :-)

Definitions have ambiguity.

When writing a definition, it is good to limit ambiguity.

A definer typically writes an approved example list to reduce ambiguity.

A list is finite, which is how they reduce ambiguity.

Therefore when writing  a definition that depends on one other definition,
it is better to refer to list instead of the lists' parent definition.
Second best is to refer to the list, and mention the definition in
case the list isn't long enough.

But if a definition depends on more than one other definition, lists
have conflicts (licenses in one but not the other).

Therefore when writing a definition that depends on two or more definitions,
it is better to refer to the definitions with boolean ANDs, and
mention the lists to softly reduce ambiguity.

-- 
Regards,
Dave