[open-science] "open science" definition?

[Tom Roche]

Apologies if this is a FAQ, but I'm not finding an answer with casual DDGing:

Folks on the main list will be aware of the recent release of the latest "Open Definition"[1] (and its discontents[2]), which is (in this context) an open-data definition[3]. I'm wondering, is there a definition of open *science*, suitable for similar reference use, that is either

* an OKF product, in the manner that it sponsors the "Open Definition"

* OKF-recommended: e.g., generated elsewhere bu pointed to by OKF documents

* recommended by folks on this list (i.e., feel free to advocate)

? I'm assuming an open-science definition would, at a high level, be relatively straightforward (since I would claim that

* open science ~= open data + open procedures for its processing
* "data" comprises both inputs to, and outputs/results of, a given study, since the results of one study typically/hopefully become inputs to another

), but I could be missing something. (And of course much could be added, e.g., regarding the importance of reproducibility.) Though straightforward, I would also advocate that a well-grounded, portable definition of open science is at least as important as one for open data, since (IMHO) the primary justification of open data is that it enables open science.

TIA, Tom Roche <Tom_Roche at pobox.com>

[1] http://opendefinition.org/
[2] thread starting https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/2014-October/010603.html
[3] "'Open knowledge' is any content, information or data that people are free to use, re-use and redistribute — without any legal, technological or social restriction"[4], and the distinction between "content, information or data" is superfluous in the scientific context.
[4] https://okfn.org/opendata/