On 1 March 2011 10:25, Jonathan Brun
<[hidden email]> wrote:
Just read this thread now and my apologies for resurrecting the thread, interesting conversation though. I stand mostly with Eaves and McKinney - CC and attribution will be a mess going forward. I do differ a bit with eaves and such in the sense that I think the main users of data will remain developers, journalists, businesses, community organizers and other professionals. The average joe will not spend his sunday afternoon mashing data up.
Public domain would be great by me. PDDL is as good as I have seen. The thing is, in my mind, you want to make it as easy as possible to use and re-use data (or parts of data). Attribution and respecting multiple licenses will put a serious stick in that wheel. The self-correcting nature of the web will ensure the quality of the data (see this open information bank called wikipedia).
Strange choice to use for illustration. Wikipedia would likely not exist as a fundamental gamechanger without its -by-sa license which assures people their efforts contribute to a common good. This doesn't happen with public domain data. Some people would make slick closed presentations. Others will process and re-release it, for further re-use distinct origins are lost. It's all unlinked, there are no inherent feedback loops or opportunities for an individual to learn more in a systematic framework.
To me, -by, is a gigantic feature, not a bug, I don't see outlined issues as impediments, looking forward just a bit, while not blocking any current projects.
Last comment, fashion industry does not use attribution when creating new garments and has no real form of copyright on their creations, yet has a vibrant (and profitable) business model. I think that is our goal:
http://blog.ted.com/2010/05/25/lessons_from_fa/
It's a fun presentation, but I don't really see the connection between it and open data. Certainly, if links can't be followed and that facility isn't featured, the importance of a few "brands" will dominate. The presentation does emphasize the top down and bottom up nature of fashion, where the 'end user' creates their own styles, which should be considered in our discussion.
I'm not looking for open data knick-knacks, but something of a cultural change where non-professionals find it interesting when using future Facebook, city budget or drive-by info systems to follow links, contribute and maybe do a bit of remixing in their own groups. People are all too willing to dismiss and also disable ideas around the open linked web, and the potential of 'ordinary' people to participate. I'm sorry if I sound like an idealogue, but this would be my definition of ouvert. The Creative Commons -by license does use the word "reasonable" and that has to be better defined. I think it would be Wikipedia great if we helped make it normal for people's work to be linked and shared.
David
Locked
