If ranting like this is the spirit of this group, then yes,
in the absence of constructive talking the restriction would
apply. But I didn't think ranting was the spirit of this
group and hence something workable could certainly have been
worked out. (01)
kind regards,
-Gunther (02)
Christopher Spottiswoode wrote:
> Wow!
>
> Following the links below soon reveals the first paragraph of the UCUM
> terms and conditions of use to be this:
>
> 1) To prevent the dilution of the purpose of the Licensed Materials,
> i.e., that of providing a definitive standard for identifying units
> of measures in electronic documents and messages, users shall not
> use any of the Licensed Materials for the purpose of developing or
> promulgating a different standard for identifying units of measure,
> regardless of whether the intended use is in the field of medicine,
> or any other field of science or trade.
>
> While it is easy to have some sympathy with its authors' bold intention,
> have they not with that ruling expressly disallowed any progressive use
> of the UCUM product by the Ontolog UoM (or any other) project?
>
> On the other hand, since the properties of standard units of measure can
> hardly be any body's property, maybe the authors and publishers of UCUM,
> like King Canute, should quit trying to stop the tide from rolling on? (03)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard (04)
|