[Discuss] Proposal: Open Source Hardware Score/Index

Mario Gómez mxgxw.alpha at gmail.com
Tue Feb 24 23:00:39 UTC 2015


That's great! It can even work both ways: If you already have a JSON you
can provide the URL to automatically calculate the indicator for your
project and vice versa: if you complete the questionnaire it could
automatically generate the JSON file that you can include in your project
as you propose that would be easy to do.

Sadly I'm a little busy this week but let me see if I can program a
functional prototype so we can experiment how it could work for the next
month. (I would not mind if someone else wants to help)


I personally like the idea of the community, because if the process is
straight forward, verifiable and transparent what matters is the result of
the evaluation system and not the person/group of persons doing the
evaluation. This is assuming that the evaluation system provides means to
minimize/prevent abuses (That's why I consider important to also
implementing a meta-evaluation system).

However... being certified from a trusted group of people it's really
important and I think that the OSHWA could be an appropriate group to do
that. But let's hear more opinions, I think that it's possible to build
something simple that helps people to follow the OSHW philosophy in their


On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Jeffrey Warren <jeff at publiclab.org> wrote:

> I really like this idea!
> Somewhat related is this idea from chatting with Alicia Gibb a few months
> ago, of a contributors.json file which would fulfill (with links, short
> descriptions, etc) all the terms of the OSH definition.
> I finally typed up the idea and our sample format here:
> http://publiclab.org/notes/warren/02-24-2015/standardizing-open-source-hardware-publication-practices-with-contributors-json
> Love to hear input. Perhaps the questionnaire could generate such a file.
> At Public Lab, it'd be interesting for the file to be auto-generated from
> our tool wiki pages. The nice part about it is that it's not specifying a
> way of browsing or aggregating projects (as other folks are exploring that
> space) but specifies a standard way to make the relevant/required
> information available for such projects to scrape/consume. Also, it's easy
> enough to write by hand and include in a github repository.
> Best,
> Jeff
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Javier Serrano <Javier.Serrano at cern.ch>
> wrote:
>> Mario, I think this is a great idea. I see this can play a role in the
>> solution to one of the biggest problems of OSHW: how to make sure
>> developers have more incentives to publish their work. Economic
>> incentives in particular. An OSHW label could give (more) prestige to
>> developers who hold it and induce purchaser-driven growth of OSHW. We
>> are already seeing that prestige is a big element in the success of OSHW
>> companies. A well advertised and supported label or mark could enlarge
>> the population of savvy customers.
>> On 02/24/2015 05:58 PM, Mario Gómez wrote:
>> > The idea is that the community validates if you are telling the  truth.
>> > To prevent abuse a meta-validation system could be implemented were you
>> > can "evaluate the evaluators" to see if their are being fair on their
>> > evaluations.
>> One alternative is to entrust the OSHWA with that role. "Community" is a
>> vague term. If I have to trust someone on whether a piece of software is
>> free software I will trust the FSF over the "community" any day. One way
>> of doing it would be through a creative use of marks or labels, in the
>> vein of what OHANDA [1] proposes. See also the work of the Wikimedia
>> Foundation [2] in this regard. In this scenario, developers have a
>> natural incentive to not misuse the mark, because they can be sued with
>> all the arsenal of trademark law if they do.
>> Cheers,
>> Javier
>> [1] http://www.ohanda.org/
>> [2] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Trademark_policy
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20150224/d7d45be2/attachment.html>

More information about the discuss mailing list