[Discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 38

Thu Mar 7 21:52:26 UTC 2013

I think as long as we can add a guide and make sure there's a key on oshwa.org it doesn't seem like a bad idea. (I only understand what some of those symbols mean, and I have scratched my head at a few of them on laundry day.)

We should also reach out to people we know who do iconography for suggestions or advice.

Cameron

On Mar 7, 2013, at 1:43 PM, malcolm stanley <a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com> wrote:

> well, you do not print the whole menu, just the stuff you ordered,
> so that immense set of options does boil down to something like this:
> 
> <laundry-tags.jpg>
> I think what I hear you essentially suggesting is that we go through this line by line and replace the items there with OSHWA equivalents for, say, a Littlebits or a Makerbot? 
> 
> _________________________________________
> malcolm stanley
> 
> google.voice:  215.821.6252        
> Cell: 267.251.9479   <------------- new
> email: a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com
> twitter / linkedin: amstanley
> Read my blog at http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com
> _________________________________________
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Catarina Mota <catarina at openmaterials.org> wrote:
> Nice image! That's what I was imagining. Even the short version may be hard to print on a PCB, but as long as they're somewhere on the packaging and product website it would be good. Not sure if this is the way to go though. What do other people think?
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:33 PM, malcolm stanley <a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com> wrote:
> sorry, with image:
> 
> <laundry.gif>
> 
> _________________________________________
> malcolm stanley
> 
> google.voice:  215.821.6252        
> Cell: 267.251.9479   <------------- new
> email: a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com
> twitter / linkedin: amstanley
> Read my blog at http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com
> _________________________________________
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:29 PM, malcolm stanley <a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com> wrote:
>  It could be similar to the laundry symbols on textiles.
> 
>  Like these?
> 
> 
> 
> So I see shapes for major categories of activity, combined with clarifying text in many cases.
> Multiple symbols can be used per item.
> The symbols can be found on the web if further clarification is required.
> Interestingly, there are instructions (positive signalling) and warnings (negative signalling) in the same symbol set.
> 
> Applied to the use case here, what I hear you suggesting is that we have a major "shape" for each category, like electronics, case, software (already has a symbol set, really, in CC), and so on, and then within each of those we can have further clarifying text or warnings.
> 
> is that your thought?
> 
> 
> _________________________________________
> malcolm stanley
> 
> google.voice:  215.821.6252        
> Cell: 267.251.9479   <------------- new
> email: a.malcolm.stanley at gmail.com
> twitter / linkedin: amstanley
> Read my blog at http://soaringhorse.blogspot.com
> _________________________________________
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Catarina Mota <catarina at openmaterials.org> wrote:
> I'm referring to a better way to determine how a project/product should be presented to the world: Does it have the OSHW logo on it? Is it described as open source hardware on its website etc.? How do we label open/closed hybrids?
> 
> It's been suggested we use two different symbols, one for fully open and another for partially open. Or that only the components that are open source be labeled that way, which may present some manufacturing difficulties. But I still like the idea of Tom's at glance label that can be both on the documentation and on the product (as a sticker or something). As Matt suggests, products that are entirely open source can just bear the blue gear logo since there is no additional info to provide about their openness; and items that are hybrids would have a flyer or sticker somewhere in/on their packaging. It could be similar to the laundry symbols on textiles. 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Tom Igoe <tom.igoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you're talking about two different things here. I'm not sure Catarina's talking about a sticker or logo, so much as an inventory tool.
> 
> t.
> 
> On Mar 7, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Matt Maier wrote:
> 
>> Catarina,
>>  
>> I agree with all of your sentiments regarding the integrity of the open source hardware definitions and mark(s).
>>  
>> It doesn't seem like a sticker or a logo will have enough space to provide any useful resolution on which subcomponents are open. And as you pointed out the source files, while they can contain infinite resolution, might be hard to find.
>>  
>> What if the mark/stamp/logo/whatever was used only to identify things that are totally open.
>>  
>> For things that are partially open, or that contain open components, there could be a flyer (like a receipt, mattress tag, or warranty card) that has enough surface area to summarize the open components and their associated licenses. The added expense would be minimal and some projects would even have enough material to just print the flyer on an inside surface as part of the manufacturing process.
>>  
>> Not so much a "mark" as an "openness card."
>>  
>> Of course it wouldn't be mandatory, but the OSHWA could define best practices and a template for the openness card to make it easy for producers to standardize so that consumers/developers know what they're looking at.
>>  
>> Cheers,
>> Matt
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 12:36:58 -0500
>> From: Catarina Mota <catarina at openmaterials.org>
>> To: The Open Source Hardware Association Discussion List
>>         <discuss at lists.oshwa.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 35
>> Message-ID:
>>         <CAH-asVYrCJ0vR_DnuTKH2vtAxT+YuGYU3FqwSWET7V=mYPxWbQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> 
>> 
>> Agreed, this could work. I wasn't suggesting that the more detailed label
>> needs to be on the product itself (though a sticker would make it easier to
>> deal with), but there should be some sort of clarity about whether or not a
>> project is open or partially open. And if we say it's partially open then
>> somewhere (on the documentation? on the website? on the product's
>> packaging?) we should state which parts are open source.
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> > -Matt
>> >
>> >
>> >> ------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Message: 2
>> >> Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 11:26:33 -0500
>> >> From: Catarina Mota <catarina at openmaterials.org>
>> >> To: The Open Source Hardware Association Discussion List
>> >>         <discuss at lists.oshwa.org>
>> >> Subject: Re: [Discuss] OSHW Best Practices / Layers of Openness
>> >> Message-ID:
>> >>         <CAH-asVZtQaQsqswJjXXoPWBHtnFpxn422+WmgJvAj22fky-W=
>> >> Q at mail.gmail.com>
>> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> >>
>> >> This is why I was so attracted to Tom's idea of a label that, no matter
>> >> where it's placed on the product, tells you right away what parts are
>> >> open.
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > discuss mailing list
>> > discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> > http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20130307/dfd746e5/attachment.html>
>> 
>> ------------------------------
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>> 
>> 
>> End of discuss Digest, Vol 10, Issue 38
>> ***************************************
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20130307/1d988dc3/attachment-0001.html>