[Discuss] Proposal: Open Source Hardware Score/Index
Pablo Kulbaba
pablokulbaba at gmail.com
Tue Feb 24 23:15:21 UTC 2015
On the validation via a community or a specific group of people, maybe
the initial open community can provide a seedstock to raise educated
people to form a later trusted group of people that gives an ulterior
certification.
PD: Had to search JSON.
On 24/02/2015 08:00 p.m., Mario Gómez wrote:
> @jeff:
>
> 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)
>
> @Javier:
>
> 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 projects.
>
> Regards,
> Mario.
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Jeffrey Warren <jeff at publiclab.org
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:discuss at lists.oshwa.org>
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org <mailto: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
--
PabloK
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20150224/9c404484/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the discuss
mailing list