[open-science] Open Science Microformats/Pattern languages? was Re: Launch of the Panton Principles for Open Data in Science + Is It Open Data?

Peter Murray-Rust pm286 at cam.ac.uk
Wed Feb 24 07:42:47 UTC 2010

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:18 AM, John Wilbanks <wilbanks at creativecommons.org
> wrote:

> We tend to prefer RDFa over microformats, as it is infinitely more
> scalable.
> Also, I would caution against badging the principles without adding *legal*
> information to data. Self-asserting the principles does not actually comply
> with the principles - only the use of an unambiguous legal tool opens up the
> principles.

I am an advocate of just adding the button. I understand and support the
work on legal agreements but the scientist must be freed from making
decisions about these as far as possible. I  (or my colleagues - human and
otherwise) have created about 150,000 buttons:


and it would be worse if we we hadn't. That data is "Open Data". It points
to the OKD page and if Rufus/John want to refine what is on that page,
great. It's a meta statement.

There's a greater danger that I blow myself up in the laboratory than that
the "Open Data" button misfires. I'll worry about the former.


Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20100224/70a1210e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the open-science mailing list