From version 60.1
edited by Patrick Masson
on 2019.06.30 at 12:08:28 PDT
To version 61.1
edited by Patrick Masson
on 2019.07.31 at 14:23:55 PDT
Change comment: There is no comment for this version



Page properties
... ... @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
2 2  
3 3  The term "open" has become popularly used to describe a variety of objects; software and technology, educational resources, education, etc. Ambiguity exists in the meaning of open. For example, open education, where anyone can enroll with only the requirement of a fee and no education, versus being available to anyone without cost. In addition to the ambiguity of open and what it enables, also lies ambiguity with the openness of organizations.
4 4  
5 +Specifically to the success of open source software, many now invoke the label to describe their works or community, without guaranteeing the freedom to study, use, modify, and redistribute. Such activity can typically be described as open-washing~-~-marketing the product or company to imply alignment with open source software licenses, communities and ethos~-~-or fauxpen source~-~-distributing software with modified licenses that are not approved by the OSI, meeting the Open Source Definition.
6 +
5 5  The "Openness Index" attempts to define open attributes while assessing the type of openness within the community of practice who's responsible for the design, development, and distribution of the open artifact.
6 6  
7 7  **//Importantly, the "Openness Index" is not designed to assess the openness of any artifact, e.g. an object, software, OER, etc. claimed to be open—there are plenty of licenses that can be used to assess the openness of an object—but rather an the organization or community that creates and manages these artifacts.//**

Submit feedback regarding this wiki to

This wiki is licensed under a Creative Commons 2.0 license
XWiki Enterprise 7.4.2 - Documentation