Hi!
Am 02.01.2010 00:23, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
> We cannot, and do not want to, trademark the words "open", "free" and
> the like, but I think we could be a little bit more assertive about whom
> we consider to be a kindred spirit and who is doing his own thing, and
> apply the tiniest amount of pressure for people to upgrade from (b) to (a).
>
> I think many of us will be surprised how many "cool OSM projects"
> actually fall into the (b) category.
Before we talk about putting projects in categories - this would assume
that there is an agreement on what those terms mean and what is the
"right" direction to move into. But as far as I got it from previous
discussions, opinions are very much divided here, too.
So what does "open" mean:
- everything is available to look at?
- everything may be copied and re-used?
- everybody may participate and change things?
- all of that?
And what does "free" mean:
- generally available?
- free of restrictions on usage?
- free of cost?
- available in an open format?
- a combination of that?
In my personal opinion, PD is free, while OSM is already non-free as it
puts severe restrictions on the usage of the data.
bye
Nop
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
