- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 23:10:40 -0400
- To: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@oerc.ox.ac.uk>, Antoine Zimmermann <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>, "Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton)" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "Abhyankar, Swapna" <sabhyank@regenstrief.org>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Cc: "ClemMcDonald@mail.nih.gov" <ClemMcDonald@mail.nih.gov>, "gunther@pragmaticdata.com" <gunther@pragmaticdata.com>
On 9/10/20 5:45 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: > The very fact that this discussion is happening suggests to me that > clearer licensing terms, in particular being explicit about what is > permitted to be done without permission, would probably promote wider > re-use of this UCUM work. Absolutely agree. This is one of the reasons why it is so important to use STANDARD licenses, such as Creative Commons licenses, instead of custom licenses. Custom licenses are a MAJOR impediment to use, no matter how permissive they try to be, BECAUSE of the effort required to evaluate them, and the uncertainty they create. Simon's comment is a perfect example: On 9/15/20 10:59 PM, Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) wrote: > Wikidata . . . does not have the resources to evaluate > the licenses for everything that they would like to use, > so they use a simple criterion: CC0 OK, anything else, > they will build their own ontology instead. David Booth
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2020 03:10:53 UTC