Lots of details on the event's website (the Challenge page is particularly relevant): http://www.opensourcewarehouse.org
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Catarina Mota <cata...@openmaterials.org> wrote:Who came up with that "draft entity relationship diagram"? Could we instead base it off of something more standard, like the dot deb format?Lots of details on the event's website (the Challenge page is particularly relevant): http://www.opensourcewarehouse.org
Simone created that document. But everything we produced should be considered a seed to be re-factored, remixed, edited, etc. So feel free to go ahead and make a new version.
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Catarina Mota <cata...@openmaterials.org> wrote:I already did, but nobody seems to know about it.Simone created that document. But everything we produced should be considered a seed to be re-factored, remixed, edited, etc. So feel free to go ahead and make a new version.
Open source hardware packaging formats like tangiblebit, skdb, mcad (which had a slight packaging aspect, although that wasn't the original goal), thingdoc, thingscrap, thingzip, cern's repository format, that thing/javascript/repo mirror format, and a long list of others have a suspicious absence in any of these email threads and it is perplexing. Naturally, these formats aren't complete solutions and still need review and more contributors, but either propose an alternative (even a proof of concept) or submit patches... right? what's the hold up?
To add to what Bryan already said, which I largely agree with, there are some other things that you may want to consider. For instance, many items in the OSHW Documentation Taxonomy have already been defined in ISO 10303 (a.k.a. Standard for the Exchange of Product models a.k.a. STEP). There are industry-led efforts going on that use ISO 10303 and related standards for hardware documentation.
http://www.asd-ssg.org/asd-ils-suite-of-specifications
LOTAR is advancing STEP AP242, which contains mechanical CAD geometry and associated product manufacturing information such as Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing according to ASME 14.41. For non-shape information such as Product Data Management (BOM) and archiving Meta-data, LOTAR is using AP239 Product Life Cycle Support (PLCS). The AP242 schema is freely available from the CAX-IF, which develops recommended practices for implementers and conducts test rounds for translators. There is a legacy standard for Technical Data Packaging, AP232, but that is being largely superseded by AP239 implementations. The AIA/ASD Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) S-series specifications cover related information for product support. Most of the S-series specifications that are in development are using PLCS.
OpenCascade is challenging, but the FreeCAD, OpenPLM, and IfcOpenShell projects have been able to build usable open source tools based on it. While I agree that BRL-CAD source code is better managed, both could be useful for open source hardware documentation development, as can commercial tools.
Charlie