<p>i think they call them &quot;dot one&quot;, &quot;dot ten&quot;, and &quot;dot eleven&quot; but the post is funnier if i don&#39;t mention that part</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://chaos.social/@gsuberland" class="u-url mention">@<span>gsuberland</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://pleroma.m68k.church/users/gorplop" class="u-url mention">@<span>gorplop</span></a></span> but this is informed by my desire to work on advancing common knowledge rather than make one-off gadgets useful</p><p>what you&#39;re describing is mostly open enough for repair (although, calibration, programming, and diagnostics are also all important so not quite)</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://chaos.social/@gsuberland" class="u-url mention">@<span>gsuberland</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://pleroma.m68k.church/users/gorplop" class="u-url mention">@<span>gorplop</span></a></span> even if we completely ignore the licensing (which is my preference, hence 0BSD) and only focus on practical requirements, if something doesn&#39;t come with calibration, firmware programming, and diagnostic documentation i probably can&#39;t make a production run of it or even easily build one (if it&#39;s complex enough); and if i can&#39;t contribute back to the community i&#39;m kind of stuck with my isolated answer</p><p>this is why if i see an altium file i kind of close the repo</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://enoent.org/@dhoe" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">@<span>dhoe</span></a></span> For whom is this useful again?</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@whitequark" class="u-url mention">@<span>whitequark</span></a></span> Easy as 1 10 11</p>

<p>i bet the people who have to talk daily about the IEEE 1101.1, IEEE 1101.10, and IEEE 1101.11 standards are really happy about the numbering</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@whitequark" class="u-url mention">@<span>whitequark</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://pleroma.m68k.church/users/gorplop" class="u-url mention">@<span>gorplop</span></a></span> my personal view is that if there&#39;s a PDF schematic, gerber files, a BOM, and preferably also a PnP file, then yes, it&#39;s open hardware. but that is likely distinct from Open Hardware as in the trademarked thing that open licensing boffins get excited about.</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.social/@whitequark" class="u-url mention">@<span>whitequark</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://pleroma.m68k.church/users/gorplop" class="u-url mention">@<span>gorplop</span></a></span> that&#39;s the kind of question where you ask ten people and get eleven answers.</p>

<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://chaos.social/@gsuberland" class="u-url mention">@<span>gsuberland</span></a></span> <span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://pleroma.m68k.church/users/gorplop" class="u-url mention">@<span>gorplop</span></a></span> (is &quot;open hardware&quot; merely &quot;something you can expect to be able to inspect and to some degree modify without pirating an application&quot;, or is it &quot;something you may be able to contribute back to without splintering the project due to format incompatibility&quot;?)</p>