Tim,
all archetypes published on openEHR are for free use, forever. Otherwise
they don't go there. Free archetypes is our credo. What Sebastian was
saying is that now that there is this freedom for a system builder or
user to create their own archetypes, there is no easy way to stop them
copy
Fred Trotter wrote:
>> There is probably nothing of great interest to wait for; they are just
>> drafting proper licenses
>>
>
> Please do not do that.
> http://lwn.net/Articles/124797/
>
>
we are not drafting any new open source licenses; for open source use,
it will be just Mozilla tri-l
Tim Churches wrote:
>
> Note that I am *not* conflating open source software with open standards
> here. Everyone is very grateful and full of praise for the entirely open
> manner in which openEHR and Ocean Informatics has made the ideas and
> nascent standards for openEHR archetypes and whatnot f
Tim Churches wrote:
>
> My own frustration with Thomas' post to this list stems from the fact
> that it the last of quite a few such posts, stretching back many years
> (at least 5 years, possibly 7 or more) announcing that openEHR software
> implementations would be available very soon now. Yet th
Thomas Beale wrote:
> I had hoped people here were actually interested in making
progress in e-Health.
Not me! I love this pedantic navel gazing and head butting.
Invigorating! There is no detail about open source licenses,
intentions, and biases too small, too insignificant, and too obvio
Thomas Beale wrote:
> Tim Churches wrote:
>> Note that I am *not* conflating open source software with open standards
>> here. Everyone is very grateful and full of praise for the entirely open
>> manner in which openEHR and Ocean Informatics has made the ideas and
>> nascent standards for openEHR
Thomas Beale wrote:
> Tim,
>
> all archetypes published on openEHR are for free use, forever. Otherwise
> they don't go there. Free archetypes is our credo.
Yeah, but where, in writing, does it say that? Any lawyer will tell you
that credos don't count in court when push comes to shove. Properly
Jason Aaron Osgood wrote:
> Thomas Beale wrote:
>
> > I had hoped people here were actually interested in making
> progress in e-Health.
>
> Not me! I love this pedantic navel gazing and head butting.
> Invigorating! There is no detail about open source licenses,
> intentions, and biases t
Tim Churches wrote:
> Thomas Beale wrote:
>
> Where? Where can I obtain these systems, load them on my laptop and
> server, and try them out with my data? You keep asserting that they are
> there, I keep asking "Where?",.
>
What you really want is a free download URL off the internet. We don'
Tim Churches wrote:
> Thomas Beale wrote:
>
>> Tim,
>>
>> all archetypes published on openEHR are for free use, forever. Otherwise
>> they don't go there. Free archetypes is our credo.
>>
>
> Yeah, but where, in writing, does it say that? Any lawyer will tell you
> that credos don't count
Jason,
I don't think any of the participants are enjoying this conversation.
However, it is not mindless pedantic navel gazing.
We are just trying to have a clear statement from Thomas and Ocean
Informatics on the IP status of their software and archetypes.
Unfortunately, the conversation is go
Open standards alone are an artificial separation of code and data
that is un-tenable. Source code without data and data without source
code are not very useful. To be circular: a .odt (Open Document Text)
file without OpenOffice.org is a .odt file without Openoffice.org.
Major thinkers going back
On Dec 2, 2006, at 11:13 AM, ivhalpc wrote:
> Open standards alone are an artificial separation of code and data
> that is un-tenable. Source code without data and data without source
> code are not very useful. To be circular: a .odt (Open Document Text)
> file without OpenOffice.org is a .odt f
Thomas Beale wrote:
> Tim Churches wrote:
>> Thomas Beale wrote:
>>
>> Where? Where can I obtain these systems, load them on my laptop and
>> server, and try them out with my data? You keep asserting that they are
>> there, I keep asking "Where?",.
>>
> What you really want is a free download
Thomas Beale wrote:
> Tim Churches wrote:
>> Thomas Beale wrote:
>>
>>> Tim,
>>>
>>> all archetypes published on openEHR are for free use, forever. Otherwise
>>> they don't go there. Free archetypes is our credo.
>>>
>> Yeah, but where, in writing, does it say that? Any lawyer will tell yo
Just a comment:
I like OpenEHR, but it is erroneous to refer to it as an "open standard".
The term "standard" is usually reserved for something certified as a
standard
by an organization or that is a de facto standard by its widespread
use. Neither
of these apply to OpenEHR at this time. It a
>
> Nonsense. If open standards (such as the IP suite of protocols) were
> meaningless, we wouldn't have an Internet today.
Ignacio is saying that IP would be meaningless without an implementation and
he is correct. TCP/IP was a success because of the focun rough consensus AND
working code.
-FT
ivhalpc wrote:
> Open standards alone are an artificial separation of code and data
> that is un-tenable. Source code without data and data without source
> code are not very useful. To be circular: a .odt (Open Document Text)
> file without OpenOffice.org is a .odt file without Openoffice.org.
Ig
On Dec 2, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Fred Trotter wrote:
> Ignacio is saying that IP would be meaningless without an
> implementation and
> he is correct. TCP/IP was a success because of the focun rough
> consensus AND
> working code.
>
> -FT
I know the slogan (and the paper) well. But the implement
On Dec 2, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Fred Trotter wrote:
>
> Ignacio is saying that IP would be meaningless without an
> implementation and
> he is correct. TCP/IP was a success because of the focun rough
> consensus AND
> working code.
>
> -FT
At any rate, I'm probably not aware of the full context
Tim Churches wrote:
> Thomas Beale wrote:
>> Tim Churches wrote:
>>> Thomas Beale wrote:
>>>
Tim,
all archetypes published on openEHR are for free use, forever. Otherwise
they don't go there. Free archetypes is our credo.
>>> Yeah, but where, in writing, does it sa
21 matches
Mail list logo
