Hi, thanks for you nice (and pretty fast) reply. And of course the invitation to this forum! 
OSHWA made a great definition and it can/will be a base for an official national standard (DIN defines the official state of art and is a great baseline for an international standard like ISO). This might raise the seriousness of the movement pretty much. Also there are different, very interessting approaches like the open-o-meter that might be included in a standard. (https://opensourcedesign.cc/wiki/index.php/Open-O-meter)
However, OSHWA (as far as I know) does not define any license, but only gives restrictions for licenses and how to use them. Open Source Hardware often comes with
the hardware itself --> CERN OHL
software (control module etc.) --> e.g. GPL 3
documentation --> e.g. CC
But these cannot be combined yet as listed in a solid way. For example CC can include a section about “non-commercial” (NC) which can not be applied practically to a product development process. Furthermore it is not fully defined, what data and in what format under what condition for collaboration has to be shared to call a Hardware as Open Source (some people talk about Teslas approach as Open Source, but it’s not). So first of all, there are besides the definition a lot of details to cover, that might help developers to get a strait guideline what steps are necessary. But we don’t want to find these details alone obviously this is the role of the Open Source Hardware experts and community (besides Jérémy is also in already )
So, if you would like to be part of the process or have any further questions, just let me know.
regards
-Martin