[Discuss] Open Hardware defintion and eagle files

[Mike Dupont]

Yes of course, you dont need it. If someone knows someone from eagle
please raise this issue, see the cc community thread for a detailed
discussion. My personal conclusion is that the dtd serves as a header
file and it is not copyrightable, and if it was the added restrictions
are incompatible with cc.
mike

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Andrew Plumb <andrew at plumb.org> wrote:
> Bare in mind that the eagle.dtd is not required to "decode" the schematic or
> layout XML files, only "validate" them as per what the Eagle tools expect.
> XML is nice & generic that way.
>
> The file is a useful reference, but good catch on the terms that make it
> undesirable to use directly in FOSS EDA options.
>
> Andrew.
>
> On 2012-09-14, at 10:29 AM, Mike Dupont wrote:
>
> Yes, Phillip that is where we are going with our work in the balkans.
> I just got a bad start and am getting hung up on license. I do plan on
> documenting everything and sharing what I learned.
> thanks for this initiative once again, I do feel that it is better
> than what we had before.
> mike
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:26 PM, phillip torrone <pt at oreilly.com> wrote:
>
> hey mike,
>
>
> if you really want to help:
>
> -write tutorials on using open tools for design (kicad, geda). post them on
> instructables, make projects or elsewhere. email links to sites like make,
> hack-a-day, etc.
>
> -make videos show how to use on using open source tools for design (kicad,
> geda) - post these on yotube, contact the many video-learning efforts out
> there like kahn, code academy, etc.
>
> -show how to convert/import the eagle xml for open tools.
>
> -run workshops that teach using these open tools, if you need any badges to
> award students to show and share their new skills, i can send you some out
> for free for kicad and geda.
>
>
> cheers,
>
> pt
>
>
>
> On Sep 14, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Mike Dupont <jamesmikedupont at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Well, for OSHW to be credible it needs to be clear.
>
> How about a OSHW disclosure process, I felt misled and I am sure more
>
> will be in the future.
>
> lets make a range of licenses like CC has and make it clear what they mean.
>
> you can call OSHW v1 the core license and then add in more "freedoms"
>
> if you want to make it look like a feature and not a bug.
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Mike Dupont wrote:
>
> I am willing to help with this process if there is interest , maybe
>
> for the next version of the license.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> James Michael DuPont
> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org
> Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com
> Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org
> Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>
>
> --
>
> "The future is already here.  It's just not very evenly distributed" --
> William Gibson
>
> Me: http://clothbot.com/wiki/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org
Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com
Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org
Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3