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