Untitled edit

There is still confusion with "open source" that newbies think it means software, which is not only what it means. We should not give a definition that only includes software and excludes all other products. That would be npov. Here is the definition by Pengo:

denotes that a product includes permission to use its source code, design documents, or origins.

Note that "source code" is a form of "origins," so it is redundant.

Here is the broader npov version:

denotes that the origins of a product are publicly accessible in part or in whole
--- Mr. Ballard 20:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

I've continued the conversation at Talk:Open source, as it fits in with recent talk. —Pengo 03:38, 27 August 2005 (UTC)Reply


suggestion: divide with 'virtual' and 'physical' OS things edit

Hi, I would suggest to divide the list in this article into two separate parts:

  • 'virtual' things (like software, ideas, procedures, etc.) existing only in your brain or that you can not directly feel with your senses.
  • 'physical' things (like hardware, food, films) that you can taste, touch, hear or see (directly with your senses).

I know this separation would be artificial, but we definitely need to get rid of this mess.

I am open for any better solution... C-Kobold (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)Reply


We could also mention these different areas of open-source application in the header. C-Kobold (talk) 22:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)Reply