[okfn-discuss] Open Definition 2.0?

Tue Oct 7 14:55:13 UTC 2014

I agree with both of you, it’s a pity this happens again after the tagline/website change. 
The Open Definition is our core document, publishing it without a discussion with the broader OK community is not going in a better direction. 

De: Aaron Wolf <wolftune at gmail.com>
Répondre: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list <okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org>>
Date: 7 octobre 2014 at 00:37:17
À: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list <okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org>>
Sujet:  Re: [okfn-discuss] Open Definition 2.0?  

I'm sorry I didn't follow up on it, but here's what happened:

Over on the OD discussion list, there was a call for voting as to whether we had reached the final v2.

My comment is here: https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/2014-August/000974.html

I never added my +1 (despite being perfectly happy with our result). I said instead that we needed to engage the larger list before any statement that there was any official anything (especially given the logo issues). Apparently, I was just ignored.

I still object to the way people active on the OD list just went and said, "ok, we all discussed and worked out things, we're all happy, now we announce to the world." I was actually there to say, "no, we need to tell the broader OK community about what we've got and get feedback before any announcements otherwise" but I failed to keep bugging people about that, and I guess nobody else shared my concerns enough to reply to my post or otherwise do this the right way.

Regards,
Aaron Wolf (just a volunteer who decided to help on the OD list)

--
Aaron Wolf
wolftune.com

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Samuel Azoulay <azoulay.sa at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all, 

I just noticed that the autumn newsletter of the Open Knowledge addresses the launch of the "Open Definition 2.0". 

Either I missed it and I apologize if this is the case, or the whole community has not been consulted or even informed of the procedure of renewal of the Open Definition. I think this is unfortunate, especially regarding such a crucial topic who contributes to shape the image of the Open Knowledge by setting standards which are broadly used.

It was apparently planned to inform OK's lists (discuss, local-coord...) in advance but this has not been done unless I'm mistaken (1 and 2).

Could you give us some news?

Cheers,
Samuel Azoulay
OK France

--
Samuel Azoulay

Twitter : @Sam_azl

_______________________________________________
okfn-discuss mailing list
okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss

_______________________________________________  
okfn-discuss mailing list  
okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org  
https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss  
Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20141007/6de0d719/attachment-0002.html>