Sarah
The French template is here: http://www.kmu.admin.ch/themen/00614/00656/00690/index.html?lang=fr
We will have to decide at one point in time on which language version is the official one.
Simon
Am 05.07.2011 08:23, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
Simon,
do you have an English translation (or French, if that is what you can get from the KMU portal)? Resp. should somebody else take care of that? German isn't really well understood further West. And I think it is really important that we do that together.
Otherwise, looks good to me.
Sarah
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 10:52:59PM +0200, Simon Poole wrote:
Am 02.07.2011 20:06, schrieb Andreas Bürki:
Am 02.07.2011 18:28, schrieb Simon Poole:
The wikimedia by-laws are definitely too complicated
That's your personal opinion. I don't think so. - General note: The more precise articles of association are, the less discussion and misunderstanding occur.
The wikimedia bylaws introduce a number of concepts not required by law, and restate a lot of things that are -already- completely satisfactory defined in law.
If I could wager a bet, I would put my money on that the articles were either wrote by a lawyer with anglo-saxon background or to satisfy one.
(there are far better examples for example /ch/open
Disagree as well on that one. IMHO they should mention registered office and business year, just as simple examples.
They do state the business year and it is completely legal not to state a place of business. If it has no undesirable consequences (I can't think of any at the current time) it avoids having to have a general assembly and change the bylaws every time the kind soul who does the administration moves.
Anyway my proposal is here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Bylaws_Swiss_OSM_Association_-_Germ...
Simon
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
I'm not talking about the final version. I just think that should we draft and discuss the AoA in a language that is understood by most. German isn't and Google Translate can get you only so far.
I'll try a French translation based on the template tonight.
Sarah
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 09:27:13AM +0200, Simon Poole wrote:
Sarah
The French template is here: http://www.kmu.admin.ch/themen/00614/00656/00690/index.html?lang=fr
We will have to decide at one point in time on which language version is the official one.
Simon
Am 05.07.2011 08:23, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
Simon,
do you have an English translation (or French, if that is what you can get from the KMU portal)? Resp. should somebody else take care of that? German isn't really well understood further West. And I think it is really important that we do that together.
Otherwise, looks good to me.
Sarah
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 10:52:59PM +0200, Simon Poole wrote:
Am 02.07.2011 20:06, schrieb Andreas Bürki:
Am 02.07.2011 18:28, schrieb Simon Poole:
The wikimedia by-laws are definitely too complicated
That's your personal opinion. I don't think so. - General note: The more precise articles of association are, the less discussion and misunderstanding occur.
The wikimedia bylaws introduce a number of concepts not required by law, and restate a lot of things that are -already- completely satisfactory defined in law.
If I could wager a bet, I would put my money on that the articles were either wrote by a lawyer with anglo-saxon background or to satisfy one.
(there are far better examples for example /ch/open
Disagree as well on that one. IMHO they should mention registered office and business year, just as simple examples.
They do state the business year and it is completely legal not to state a place of business. If it has no undesirable consequences (I can't think of any at the current time) it avoids having to have a general assembly and change the bylaws every time the kind soul who does the administration moves.
Anyway my proposal is here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Bylaws_Swiss_OSM_Association_-_Germ...
Simon
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
I've added a very very very rough English translation.
Am 05.07.2011 09:26, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
I'm not talking about the final version. I just think that should we draft and discuss the AoA in a language that is understood by most. German isn't and Google Translate can get you only so far.
I'll try a French translation based on the template tonight.
Sarah
I made it a bit less rough, so it should now only be very, very rough - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Bylaws_Swiss_OSM_Association_-_Engl...
Nevertheless, I suggest using the english version as discussion base and hopefully come to an agreement which we then can subsequently translate to de fr it &xy if required.
Marc
On 05.07.2011, at 10:53, Simon Poole wrote:
I've added a very very very rough English translation.
Am 05.07.2011 09:26, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
I'm not talking about the final version. I just think that should we draft and discuss the AoA in a language that is understood by most. German isn't and Google Translate can get you only so far.
I'll try a French translation based on the template tonight.
Sarah
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Sorry but I don't agree at all with the changes (except with some of the language ones).
While the intent in general is the same, it is no longer a near exact one to one translation of the German original.
There are a couple of places where you have exchanged expressions with ones that are not synonyms: non-profit vs. non-commercial, participate vs. take an interest in.
You deviate significantly from the German text in numerous places and the readers should be aware that you have already unilaterally changed what we are talking about.
With other words you've created a new document that departs significantly from the SECO template (and, less important, from my proposal) that we then will have to re-translate back to German, French and possibly Italian, which is exactly what I wanted to avoid.
Simon
Am 05.07.2011 12:18, schrieb Marc Zoss:
I made it a bit less rough, so it should now only be very, very rough - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Bylaws_Swiss_OSM_Association_-_Engl...
Nevertheless, I suggest using the english version as discussion base and hopefully come to an agreement which we then can subsequently translate to de fr it&xy if required.
Marc
On 05.07.2011, at 10:53, Simon Poole wrote:
I've added a very very very rough English translation.
Am 05.07.2011 09:26, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
I'm not talking about the final version. I just think that should we draft and discuss the AoA in a language that is understood by most. German isn't and Google Translate can get you only so far.
I'll try a French translation based on the template tonight.
Sarah
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
My aim was to come up with a single draft version to base the entire discussion upon. In order to make the draft readable I made a couple of edits, mainly getting rid of (german-specific) "Bandwurmsätze" and "Substantivitis". Regarding the content, I do not believe that my edits changed anything substantially. At least, it was not my intention to change anything unilaterally.
But now concerning your specific issues:
1. non-commercial vs. non-profit Original: "Such activities can be of both commercial as well as non-commercial nature. // The Association has no commercial purpose." Edit: "Such activities may include both non-profit as well as profit-oriented ones.//The Association itself is not profit-oriented."
I stumbled across the second part where I found that the para "The Association has no commercial purpose" is rather meaningless and considered profit-oriented more appropriate. For coherence reasons, I then also changed the first sentence to "non-/profit-oriented". You may want to elucidate (i) what "commercial purpose" comprehends, (ii) how it differs from not profit-oriented, and (iii) which is why more appropriate.
2. take an interest in vs. participate Original: "Furthermore, the association can be a member of other organizations pursuing similar goals or take an interest in such organizations." Edit: "Furthermore, the Association may be a member of or participate in other organisations pursuing similar goals."
Bureaucratic language aside, to "take an interest in such organisations" is about as unspecific as it gets and can mean anything (e.g. "we think openmapquest is a good thing"). To me "participate" certainly expresses a specific engagement and is thus more appropriate.
I must admit I do not really care about the seco template. I think what is needed is a readable and understandable draft of the bylaws in order to have an inclusive discussion. Your draft was a first step and I tried to make it somewhat readable. Personally, I would not at all care too much about the translations yet but first get the document's content going. If you do not want to change anything for translation or whatever reason, then you do not need to discuss it at first hand. And another question: Do we really need to re-translate the bylaws?
If some of my edits are not considered appropriate by the interested parties, feel free to revert anything you like.
Marc
On 05.07.2011, at 13:24, Simon Poole wrote:
Sorry but I don't agree at all with the changes (except with some of the language ones).
While the intent in general is the same, it is no longer a near exact one to one translation of the German original.
There are a couple of places where you have exchanged expressions with ones that are not synonyms: non-profit vs. non-commercial, participate vs. take an interest in.
You deviate significantly from the German text in numerous places and the readers should be aware that you have already unilaterally changed what we are talking about.
With other words you've created a new document that departs significantly from the SECO template (and, less important, from my proposal) that we then will have to re-translate back to German, French and possibly Italian, which is exactly what I wanted to avoid.
Simon
Am 05.07.2011 12:18, schrieb Marc Zoss:
I made it a bit less rough, so it should now only be very, very rough - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Bylaws_Swiss_OSM_Association_-_Engl...
Nevertheless, I suggest using the english version as discussion base and hopefully come to an agreement which we then can subsequently translate to de fr it&xy if required.
Marc
On 05.07.2011, at 10:53, Simon Poole wrote:
I've added a very very very rough English translation.
Am 05.07.2011 09:26, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
I'm not talking about the final version. I just think that should we draft and discuss the AoA in a language that is understood by most. German isn't and Google Translate can get you only so far.
I'll try a French translation based on the template tonight.
Sarah
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Am 05.07.2011 14:43, schrieb Marc Zoss:
My aim was to come up with a single draft version to base the entire discussion upon. In order to make the draft readable I made a couple of edits, mainly getting rid of (german-specific) "Bandwurmsätze" and "Substantivitis". Regarding the content, I do not believe that my edits changed anything substantially. At least, it was not my intention to change anything unilaterally.
See my mail to the list on the 30th of June, there is at least one good and pragmatic reason to use a German master version. It could just as good be French, except that it's just not particularly likely that we would want to register with a French speaking trade registry. If money and time are not of any concern, sure lets go with an English document.
But now concerning your specific issues:
- non-commercial vs. non-profit
Original: "Such activities can be of both commercial as well as non-commercial nature. // The Association has no commercial purpose." Edit: "Such activities may include both non-profit as well as profit-oriented ones.//The Association itself is not profit-oriented."
I stumbled across the second part where I found that the para "The Association has no commercial purpose" is rather meaningless and considered profit-oriented more appropriate. For coherence reasons, I then also changed the first sentence to "non-/profit-oriented". You may want to elucidate (i) what "commercial purpose" comprehends, (ii) how it differs from not profit-oriented, and (iii) which is why more appropriate.
There are two issues here
- non-profit is used in colloquial English for a whole class of organisations ranging from simply tax-exempt to charitable (which probably matches best with the Swiss "gemeinnützig")
- non-profit is also difficult to translate, does it mean non-profit as in no profit (which would unduly constrain the organisation) or does it mean not profit orientated as you changed your text to. The later is not really necessary because Swiss associations by definition can not be profit orientated, however they can and very often do, directly represent and support commercial interests of their members. My intention was to make clear that we are not an industry association or similar
IMHO we could simply strike the last sentence of (2) and I believe we should reformulate the 2nd sentence (in the German original) : on rereding it, it doesn't seem really clear that "Aktivitäten" are the activities of the "Projekten, Personen und Unternehmungen". Does anybody have a better suggestion?
- take an interest in vs. participate
Original: "Furthermore, the association can be a member of other organizations pursuing similar goals or take an interest in such organizations." Edit: "Furthermore, the Association may be a member of or participate in other organisations pursuing similar goals."
Bureaucratic language aside, to "take an interest in such organisations" is about as unspecific as it gets and can mean anything (e.g. "we think openmapquest is a good thing"). To me "participate" certainly expresses a specific engagement and is thus more appropriate.
In this kind (contracts, bylaws and so on) of context, I have never seen the phrase used in any other way as a financial stake in a company. You are insofar correct that the German might be to unspecific.
I must admit I do not really care about the seco template. I think what is needed is a readable and understandable draft of the bylaws in order to have an inclusive discussion. Your draft was a first step and I tried to make it somewhat readable. Personally, I would not at all care too much about the translations yet but first get the document's content going.
We could use any other template, however the SECO one is reasonably recent and has other language versions available, which, I hope, are usable. More important it comes from a known and reasonably respected "official" source. As long as we don't stray to far from the original text we should be safe from having to get legal counsel, or having people asking us why we don't get some.
If you do not want to change anything for translation or whatever reason, then you do not need to discuss it at first hand. And another question: Do we really need to re-translate the bylaws?
See above and mail from the 30th, the point of the exercise was not to create the all singing and dancing world moving English language bylaws, I just ran the bloody stuff through google translate and wikified the result so that non-German and French speakers would roughly know what we are talking about (and hope that is good enough for the OSMF).
If some of my edits are not considered appropriate by the interested parties, feel free to revert anything you like.
Not not appreciated, but some of the changes are orthogonal to what I was trying to achieve.
Simon
Hi everyone
My view on this Association stuff is:
- I don't really want an association. I can perfectly map without it an everything... Except, when it comes to communication with companies, organizations and government entities. For me, that is the main advantage of having an organization. Being visible as a group and giving the others something to deal with, other than the single mapper.
- We are not lawyers, at least it doesn't seem to have one on this mailinglist. I favor the KISS principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Legal battles are not fun an if it gets to that stage, I will have jumped the ship for sure. Mapping is fun, I can still do that. In short: If this template is any good, no need to turn each word over twice for me. Just gives a lot of work an hatred.
- Keep the association as light as possible. Openstreetmap lives from people actually doing something. The association will probably follow the same lead.
So what are your views on the association, It's not clear to me from the E-Mails on the list what everyones opinions are on why we need an association and hat they want it to provide.
Have a nice evening Datendelphin
Hello, congratulations for your work. I will not go into details of the statutes, I am not proficient on the subject. The important thing is that a structure exists and what is attached (or is a local representative) of the OSM Foundation. So for me it is necessary that the statute is consistent with those of the OSM Foundation. In any case, you will go there unless it's too complicated and at worst it will continue to work anyway. Best regards.
Hello , félicitation pour votre travail. Je ne veux pas rentrer dans les détails des statuts, je ne suis pas compétant sur le sujet. L'important c'est qu'une structure existe et quelle soit rattaché ( ou soit un représentant local ) de la fondation OSM. Donc pour moi il faut que les statuts soit en accord avec ceux de la fondation OSM. De toutes façon, allez y on vous suivra, sauf si c'est trop compliqué et au pire on continuera à travailler quand même.
Salutation.
Pierre Boizot
CH-1009 PULLY
Openstreetmapdiarys http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PirBoazo/diary BlogPerso http://pirboazo-sys.blogspot.com/
2011/7/5 datendelphin mailinglist@osm.datendelphin.net
Hi everyone
My view on this Association stuff is:
- I don't really want an association. I can perfectly map without it an
everything... Except, when it comes to communication with companies, organizations and government entities. For me, that is the main advantage of having an organization. Being visible as a group and giving the others something to deal with, other than the single mapper.
- We are not lawyers, at least it doesn't seem to have one on this
mailinglist. I favor the KISS principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Legal battles are not fun an if it gets to that stage, I will have jumped the ship for sure. Mapping is fun, I can still do that. In short: If this template is any good, no need to turn each word over twice for me. Just gives a lot of work an hatred.
- Keep the association as light as possible. Openstreetmap lives from
people actually doing something. The association will probably follow the same lead.
So what are your views on the association, It's not clear to me from the E-Mails on the list what everyones opinions are on why we need an association and hat they want it to provide.
Have a nice evening Datendelphin _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:43:18PM +0200, Marc Zoss wrote:
My aim was to come up with a single draft version to base the entire discussion upon. In order to make the draft readable I made a couple of edits, mainly getting rid of (german-specific) "Bandwurmsätze" and "Substantivitis". Regarding the content, I do not believe that my edits changed anything substantially. At least, it was not my intention to change anything unilaterally.
The idea of the translation was really to discuss entire paragraphs not single words. For the final version we should really stick as closely as possible to the formulations in the seco template because then we can be sure that it is compatible with Swiss law.
Sarah
I highly agree to have an early and full participation on the association's bylaws. To my perception english seems to be the lingua franca here - I will give it a go and translate Simon's german draft to english then which allows us having a joint work in progress.
Marc
On 05.07.2011, at 09:26, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
I'm not talking about the final version. I just think that should we draft and discuss the AoA in a language that is understood by most. German isn't and Google Translate can get you only so far.
I'll try a French translation based on the template tonight.
Sarah
On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 09:27:13AM +0200, Simon Poole wrote:
Sarah
The French template is here: http://www.kmu.admin.ch/themen/00614/00656/00690/index.html?lang=fr
We will have to decide at one point in time on which language version is the official one.
Simon
Am 05.07.2011 08:23, schrieb Sarah Hoffmann:
Simon,
do you have an English translation (or French, if that is what you can get from the KMU portal)? Resp. should somebody else take care of that? German isn't really well understood further West. And I think it is really important that we do that together.
Otherwise, looks good to me.
Sarah
On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 10:52:59PM +0200, Simon Poole wrote:
Am 02.07.2011 20:06, schrieb Andreas Bürki:
Am 02.07.2011 18:28, schrieb Simon Poole:
The wikimedia by-laws are definitely too complicated
That's your personal opinion. I don't think so. - General note: The more precise articles of association are, the less discussion and misunderstanding occur.
The wikimedia bylaws introduce a number of concepts not required by law, and restate a lot of things that are -already- completely satisfactory defined in law.
If I could wager a bet, I would put my money on that the articles were either wrote by a lawyer with anglo-saxon background or to satisfy one.
(there are far better examples for example /ch/open
Disagree as well on that one. IMHO they should mention registered office and business year, just as simple examples.
They do state the business year and it is completely legal not to state a place of business. If it has no undesirable consequences (I can't think of any at the current time) it avoids having to have a general assembly and change the bylaws every time the kind soul who does the administration moves.
Anyway my proposal is here http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Bylaws_Swiss_OSM_Association_-_Germ...
Simon
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch
Already done ....
Am 05.07.2011 10:55, schrieb Marc Zoss:
I highly agree to have an early and full participation on the association's bylaws. To my perception english seems to be the lingua franca here - I will give it a go and translate Simon's german draft to english then which allows us having a joint work in progress.
-
datendelphin -
Marc Zoss -
Pierre BOIZOT -
Sarah Hoffmann -
Simon Poole