Re: Open Registry vs. Open Data

On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 12:42 PM, William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org> wrote:
> On 10-09-05 16:00, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
>>
>> As I said, the first line on the CKAN home page says: "CKAN is a
>> registry of open data and content packages.". Therefore I think there
>> is a reasonable expectation that the packages registered there are
>> open.
>
> Actually, it is my understanding that CKAN is an
> *open registry* and includes packages that are
> partially open, unclearly licensed or even that
> someone thinks should be open but at present are
> not.
>
> I agree that the text is misleading and should
> probably be fixed. I'm crossposting to ckan-discuss,
> and if nobody objects I'll change it to "CKAN is
> an open registry of data and content packages"

That would certainly be clearer.

> It seems to me the case that packages in the curated
> LOD group should all be themselves open, by
> definition.

That would be my impression as well. Though the presence of
bio2rdf-cas raises questions.

Best,
Alan

>
> Cheers,
> -w
> --
> William Waites           <william.waites@okfn.org>
> Mob: +44 789 798 9965    Open Knowledge Foundation
> Fax: +44 131 464 4948                Edinburgh, UK
>
> RDF Indexing, Clustering and Inferencing in Python
>                http://ordf.org/
>

Received on Tuesday, 7 September 2010 03:57:46 UTC