Vision/Suggestions

= Suggestions and Comments =

= Summary =

Very useful overview diagram from JG: http://www.glinkr.net/map/spot/1392/

Key areas to work on (distilled from the discussion):


 * 1) Better explanation of "Why" (benefits of openness)
 * 2) Better explanation of "What"
 * 3) * What we are doing
 * 4) * What our goals are
 * 5) * Who we are (see next item)
 * 6) Clearer structure and governance

Original questions put to the list (okfn-discuss thread):


 * What do you think the Open Knowledge Foundation is?
 * What do you think it should be doing?
 * What impact should it be having?

= Why (What are Benefits of Openness) =

Luis:

why are we promoting open? Is it just a fuzzy sense that open is good, or can we get more specific? The 'about' page defines open, but doesn't say why open is a good thing.

Possible Answer 1
The cost of distributing and creating (digital) information has been dropping dramatically, greatly reducing the barriers to participation in the creation and reuse of that information.

Making information open is essential to realizing fully the social, cultural and commercial benefits associated to these changes -- both in terms of access to existing material and in the creation of new knowledge.

= What's Distinctive About the OKF =

Broad Vision
A clear espousal of openness with explicit application across avariety of domains (so not just content, not just data -- genes to geodata, sonnets to statistics ...). Many other groups/orgs are focused on one particular area or activity.

Geographical
Not US-centred/based (as many of existing OK orgs are). Have a clear UK/EU base with strong connections elsewhere.

Organizational Model
We are more like Apache than FSF: i.e. a community built around a network of projects (and working groups) joined by shared understanding of openness (and its value) -- as opposed to something centrally driven and organized (and very strongly committed to a particular philosophy).

= What Are Our Goals =


 * Promoting openness
 * Mike L: make open ubiquitous and routine
 * Building open knowledge (creating open material)
 * A sustainable and vibrant community
 * Developing tools and services in relation to the above
 * An attempt to increase "User Freedom" for data similar (in my opinionidentical) to the FSF's goal to increase "User Freedom" for code. Patrick Anderson

Rob Myers
http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/2009-July/001550.html

It's an advocacy organization for the liberty of individuals to access and exploit information, data and facts of historical, practical or academic importance and materials that support these resources. This advocacy can be practical and material (KnowledgeForge) or media based and philosophical (position statements, comments on debates, e.g. on database copyright or OSM's licence).

= What Are We Doing =

See http://www.glinkr.net/map/spot/1392/ and http://www.okfn.org/projects/


 * OKF as creator in own right
 * OKF as incubator

= Organization =


 * (?) Rename governance to 'organization' or 'structure'
 * Make goverance doc more prominent
 * Formalize membership

Luis's comment (http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/2009-July/001545.html):

If Apache is the model maybe we should spend some time thinking about what OKFN brings to the table for new projects- why would I want to make my project part of OKFN? apache's answers include to potential projects include:


 * structure: when you become one of us, you inherit our organizational structure, membership rules, etc.
 * mentoring: we provide some collected wisdom until you transition out of 'incubation' into mature project status
 * infrastructure: web hosting, etc.
 * legal resources
 * etc.

= Miscellaneous =

A History Page
A history page giving history of the org. 1

More Visibility
Rob Myers (http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/2009-July/001550.html):

The practical impact OKF has had is great, it can be extended, and it needs more recognition. People should be using OKF's tools and arguments when dealing with datasets and open access materials and they should *know* that they are doing so.

Preparing for when open wins
Luis: It would be good if OKF starting thinking now about 'what happens when open knowledge is routine'

Rufus: the main danger from "open knowledge being routine" would be if our prime activity were promoting "openness". However, though we obviously do quite a bit of that, a lot of what we do (probably the majority) is providing services, tools, events related to open knowledge and the demand for these will only increase if open knowledge becomes more mainstream.