# A new draft of the Open Source AI Definition: v.0.0.6 is available for comments

**URL:** <https://discuss.opensource.org/t/a-new-draft-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-v-0-0-6-is-available-for-comments/260>\
**Category:** Open Source AI\
**Tags:** process\
**Created:** [March 11, 2024, 8:11am UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/a-new-draft-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-v-0-0-6-is-available-for-comments/260 "2024-03-11T08:11:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stefano](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/discuss.opensource.org/stefano/32/4_2.png) [@stefano](https://discuss.opensource.org/u/stefano)\
**Post date:** [March 18, 2024, 5:41pm UTC](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/a-new-draft-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-v-0-0-6-is-available-for-comments/260/12 "2024-03-18T17:41:09Z")

</div>

Indeed, it’s a known fact that the debate around data is divisive. I also think that the board wouldn’t be particularly interested in approving a definition that is purely aspirational, containing a null set of meaningful AI systems.

We also need to move on with the process, we can’t continue debating the same thing without adding new elements. Let’s get to the [next phase](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/moving-on-to-the-next-phase-of-system-analysis/261/), check what happens with the draft the way it is (the whole training dataset not required) and record what objections there are to data transparency requirements as the next best thing after public access to the full dataset.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.opensource.org/t/a-new-draft-of-the-open-source-ai-definition-v-0-0-6-is-available-for-comments/260)._