You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the Guide for open standards, it would be good to link directly to the TBS definition of "open standard".
I tried to chase down the definition, in the various references given, but was unable to. I was looking for some key phrases like "royalty-free", etc.
Unlike the term "open source", there isn't a completely clear, widely agreed-on definition of "open standard" (although the definition of "open standard" given by the Open Source Initiative is good and is maybe the closest thing we have to a formal definition of the term -- see also additional commentary re "FRAND" here). Thus the importance both of linking to the TBS definition, if there is one, and of ensuring that that definition is a solid one that allows unrestricted, non-monopolized, royalty-free implementation in open source software.
(I think issue #25 may be related to this, though it's not exactly the same.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
You are correct, the Open Standard section has not yet been implemented. Very limited work has been done on that topic (although I know it's a very important one).
Part of the issue lies with the fact that it is not as easily or widely defined (or rather accepted) as part of our research. OSS best practices on the other end are widely defined and practiced so it was in some ways a lower hanging fruit.
In the Guide for open standards, it would be good to link directly to the TBS definition of "open standard".
I tried to chase down the definition, in the various references given, but was unable to. I was looking for some key phrases like "royalty-free", etc.
Unlike the term "open source", there isn't a completely clear, widely agreed-on definition of "open standard" (although the definition of "open standard" given by the Open Source Initiative is good and is maybe the closest thing we have to a formal definition of the term -- see also additional commentary re "FRAND" here). Thus the importance both of linking to the TBS definition, if there is one, and of ensuring that that definition is a solid one that allows unrestricted, non-monopolized, royalty-free implementation in open source software.
(I think issue #25 may be related to this, though it's not exactly the same.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: