Yes a copyright, a license, and sometimes terms of use.
Vriendelijke groet,
William Goossen
Verzonden met mijn Winphone Nokia Lumia 800
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: openehr-technical-request at lists.openehr.org
Verzonden: 6-5-2013 18:02
Aan: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org
Onderwerp: openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8
Send openEHR-technical mailing list submissions to
openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
openehr-technical-request at lists.openehr.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
openehr-technical-owner at lists.openehr.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of openEHR-technical digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Archetype meta-data - moving foward (David Moner)
2. Re: Archetype meta-data - moving foward (Diego Bosc?)
3. Re: Archetype meta-data - moving foward (Thomas Beale)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 11:36:44 +0200
From: David Moner <[email protected]>
To: For openEHR technical discussions
<openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
Subject: Re: Archetype meta-data - moving foward
Message-ID:
<CAPfA0Q_QP_wReUk+sj8PxVnL_X-ANmZ_KTg-oa-7pw4rExtAhg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
I have added a "license" attribute. An archetype can need both a copyright
and the applicable license.
David
2013/5/3 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>
> On 03/05/2013 11:28, Diego Bosc? wrote:
>
> By the way, we should use the momentum to also revamp the available
> metadata. A few ideas:
>
> - Move 'copyright' from language specific information to general
> metadata (It's not being really translated at the moment).
> - Move 'references' from other_details to general metadata (It's
> important enough IMHO).
> - Information about date of validation, validity time and who validated it.
> - RM version this archetype was based on.
> - etc.
>
>
>
> Personally I would agree with all of the above. I have already added the
> rm_release to the ARCHETYPE class now in the AOM (not yet pushed up), but
> for the others, I suggest we try to create a wider discussion to do this
> exercise with a small amount of discipline, but still be in a
> crowd-sourcing mode (is that possible ;-)
>
> To that end, I added a child page to the Knowledge Artefact
> Identification
> page<http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/Development+and+Governance+of+Knowledge+Artefacts>,
> here<http://www.openehr.org/wiki/display/spec/Knowledge+Artefact+Meta-data>,
> dedicated to meta-data. I added some tables where we can potentially review
> the current model and propose changes. If people think this isn't
> sufficiently detailed, feel free to rework it in another way.
>
> - thomas
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
>
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
--
David Moner Cano
Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME
Instituto ITACA
http://www.ibime.upv.es
Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV)
Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta
Valencia ? 46022 (Espa?a)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130506/a190fa03/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 11:47:46 +0200
From: Diego Bosc? <[email protected]>
To: For openEHR technical discussions
<openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org>
Subject: Re: Archetype meta-data - moving foward
Message-ID:
<CAFx8UwC5KmfbDqCxg8NCpfW3UJ9Jy4DCfhjfCj1QkrbRm3TKuQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
In fact, 'license' could be translated, but translating 'copyright'
makes less sense
2013/5/6 David Moner <damoca at gmail.com>:
> I have added a "license" attribute. An archetype can need both a copyright
> and the applicable license.
>
> David
>
>
> 2013/5/3 Thomas Beale <thomas.beale at oceaninformatics.com>
>>
>> On 03/05/2013 11:28, Diego Bosc? wrote:
>>
>> By the way, we should use the momentum to also revamp the available
>> metadata. A few ideas:
>>
>> - Move 'copyright' from language specific information to general
>> metadata (It's not being really translated at the moment).
>> - Move 'references' from other_details to general metadata (It's
>> important enough IMHO).
>> - Information about date of validation, validity time and who validated
>> it.
>> - RM version this archetype was based on.
>> - etc.
>>
>>
>> Personally I would agree with all of the above. I have already added the
>> rm_release to the ARCHETYPE class now in the AOM (not yet pushed up), but
>> for the others, I suggest we try to create a wider discussion to do this
>> exercise with a small amount of discipline, but still be in a crowd-sourcing
>> mode (is that possible ;-)
>>
>> To that end, I added a child page to the Knowledge Artefact Identification
>> page, here, dedicated to meta-data. I added some tables where we can
>> potentially review the current model and propose changes. If people think
>> this isn't sufficiently detailed, feel free to rework it in another way.
>>
>> - thomas
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> openEHR-technical mailing list
>> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
>>
>> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> David Moner Cano
> Grupo de Inform?tica Biom?dica - IBIME
> Instituto ITACA
> http://www.ibime.upv.es
>
> Universidad Polit?cnica de Valencia (UPV)
> Camino de Vera, s/n, Edificio G-8, Acceso B, 3? planta
> Valencia ? 46022 (Espa?a)
>
> _______________________________________________
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 15:05:48 +0100
From: Thomas Beale <[email protected]>
To: openehr-technical at lists.openehr.org
Subject: Re: Archetype meta-data - moving foward
Message-ID: <5187B8BC.7010007 at oceaninformatics.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
On 06/05/2013 10:47, Diego Bosc? wrote:
> In fact, 'license' could be translated, but translating 'copyright'
> makes less sense
>
Clearly we are not in the business of creating translations of things
like the CC licenses ourselves, which is the license of archetypes (at
least openEHR ones). We would need to rely on those ones that are
created by creativecommons.org community. This CC page
<http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Translate> talks about translating
licences.
It's not obvious to me on a brief look, but I would expect that for any
given canonical license URL like
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ to have equivalents in
other languages like http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/es
for Spanish etc.
I also suspect that for a CC (and other) license in English language,
and with 'international' as the jurisdiction, that English is actually
the official language of the license, for all users, on the assumption
that any court that might process a case based on one of these licenses
would be an international court and have English as its working language
(like the Hague ICC does). The only use of translations - I think - is
to just enable non-EN maternal language users to more easily understand
the license.
So we either treat the license field as a non-translated field and just
include canonical (EN) URL, and assume the user will go and find the
translation if they need one - I think this will be easier. If we treat
it as a translatable field, then we probably have to figure out a
correct URL for each translation, which might just be the 'en' one for
languages in which the CC license is not yet available. This seems an
annoyance with no real gain.
- thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130506/b00885e1/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
openEHR-technical mailing list
openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
http://lists.openehr.org/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org
------------------------------
End of openEHR-technical Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8
************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.openehr.org/pipermail/openehr-technical_lists.openehr.org/attachments/20130506/c7a10fcd/attachment.html>
