Hi Seref, Thanks for your concerns and well thought out points.
If you read my original posting, I didn't ask Tom to stop using Framemaker. I ask for some output in place of (or in addition to) the PDF and Framemaker formats. I'll happily accept .doc files at this point. It seems that we have a different perspective on what the sense of trust in the community is also. But that is an entirely other subject. :-) --Tim On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 11:08 +0100, Seref Arikan wrote: > Dear all, > I'd like to express my concerns about practical outcomes of suggested > changes, changes based on potential benefits. I'd appreciate your > input about the use cases we are discussing just to make sure that I > get this right. > First of all, translation of openEHR documentation to other languages > is a very critical task, which would be quite a challenge, because we > are talking about very high quality documentation, to which I keep > going back quite often, mostly to find out that a point that I was > missing has already been there, expressed carefully. At one point I've > thought about translating the docs to Turkish, my mother tongue, and > realized that not having a Framemaker licence was the least of my > problems. Reflecting the same quality, and more important than that, > the same semantics consistenty in other languages is a huge challange. > It requires understanding of the domain, the standard, and possesion > of more than ordinary control over two languages, one being English. > Also, as a member of openEHR community I would not like to see > translations of the specs in the wild, with no official approval or > inclusion from openEHR foundation, since this can easily lead to > confusing documentation on an already confusing topic, which is > challanging enough to master with really good docs. > I would like to know if there are efforts, or even intentions of > translating this documentation to other languages, and the owners of > these intentions. How many translations of the documentation will be > for Spanish for example? If a person would give this task a try, due > to reasons expressed above, he/she would have to possess quite a lot > of time, skills and he/she would have to communicate with openEHR to > make sure that the outcomes do not do harm instead of doing good. My > opinion is, this would be an effort linked to an institutuion like a > university, or a government agency, working with openEHR. I can't see > people working in their homes/offices on their own, doing this whole > work, and if there are people like this, I really want to know them. > The point? Well, the translation would mostly likely be performed by > people with resources. A framemaker 9 licence would be the least of > their problems. Again, please let us know if there is a person out > there, comminting to translation, committing to ensure its quality, > and committing to its maintanance, and is not able to move forward, > just because he/she can't afford a licence for Framemaker. > I appreciate the effort for preserving the idea of openness in all > aspects of openEHR, but I want to see Tom producing documentation > efficiently. This is his time spend in front of a computer, and I do > not want him working slower, or producing inferior quality output, > which is what will obviously happen if he does not use Framemaker. I > have to confess that I am failing to see the fairness of asking Tom to > commit more of his time today, for potential future benefits, which > have significant prerequisites that must be covered, before they can > be realized. > Having used Framemaker html, xml outputs to produce documentation for > Eclipse plugins, I'm fine with the idea of documentation being > exported to these formats from framemaker. PDF outputs are simply read > only docs, doing exactly what they are created for, providing cross > platform access to documentation. So I don't see the point of > critisizing them for not being appropriate for translation either, > since they are not produced to be edited at all. > Conclusion: please let us see concrete use cases,that justifies making > the suggested changes, build on not only on idealism but also actual > cost benefit analysis, and we can build a solution, or a roadmap from > there. I'd rather see this wonderful community move forward, trying to > stay close to its principles as much as it can, with its available > resources, than see it watch others progress while we fail to do so > just because we're getting ready for a better future all the time. > > Best Regards > Seref > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Tim Cook > <timothywayne.cook at gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 10:08 +0200, Erik Sundvall wrote: > > > In a previous license discussion I suggested the much more > commonly > > understood and more open CC-BY licence > > (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) to be used for > the > > specification documents, but I believe the discussion then > slipped > > over to just licensing for archetypes. Can we solve this > while we are > > at it? > > > Well, I'm still waiting to hear from the openEHR Foundation > Board > (officially) on this issue since they are the only governing > body we > have. > > I'm not personally concerned with the notice you pointed out > because my > re-use strictly adheres to items 2&3. However, commercial > users/developers such as Ocean Informatics may or may not be > in breach > of that license. That is for the Foundation Board to decide. > There > does seem to be some conflict with some of the content notices > and > licenses regarding commercial use though. It basically > depends on where > you look on the website. > > The openEHR Foundation, as a legal entity in the UK (and the > web site > claims globally), supported by CHIME/UCL and Ocean Informatics > I assume > have sought proper legal counsel? > > --Tim > > > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-clinical mailing list > openEHR-clinical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-clinical > -- *************************************************************** Timothy Cook, MSc LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook Skype ID == (upon request) Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook You may get my Public GPG key from popular keyservers or from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/private/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20090925/34df47f0/attachment.asc>
