07:02:16 RRSAgent has joined #egov 07:02:16 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-irc 07:02:21 zakim, this will be egov 07:02:21 ok, josema; I see T&S_EGOV()3:00AM scheduled to start 2 minutes ago 07:03:52 trackbot, start telcon 07:03:54 RRSAgent, make logs public 07:03:56 Zakim, this will be EGOV 07:03:56 ok, trackbot; I see T&S_EGOV()3:00AM scheduled to start 3 minutes ago 07:03:57 Meeting: eGovernment Interest Group Teleconference 07:03:57 Date: 23 October 2008 07:04:28 present: john, renke, martin, jeff, amit, benjamin, vagner, oscar 07:05:46 amit__ has joined #egov 07:06:34 present+ nobuo, helmut 07:07:03 topic: welcome and intros 07:07:35 [intros] 07:09:24 Vagner-br has joined #egov 07:11:33 ocr has joined #egov 07:12:56 present+ ?? (Adobe, XML Security) 07:14:47 Beng has joined #egov 07:15:02 jeffs has joined #egov 07:16:21 T&S_EGOV()3:00AM has now started 07:16:22 +Esterel 07:16:26 amit_ has joined #egov 07:16:32 ns has joined #egov 07:17:09 john has joined #eGov 07:18:40 John : agenda ok ? 07:18:42 scribeNick: Beng 07:19:01 take input from outside work and kick on with use cases at 9H45 07:19:14 martin has joined #egov 07:19:26 the group & jose have had a number of conversations 07:19:38 talk about semic 07:20:14 renke to introduce 07:20:48 martin points out he worked with the previous project 07:21:12 agenda : http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/TPAC2008 07:22:14 csolc has joined #egov 07:22:25 slides will be available on wiki (?) 07:22:41 OCR has joined #egov 07:26:08 I'm logging. I don't understand 'list attendants', josema. Try /msg RRSAgent help 07:26:13 zakim, who is here? 07:26:13 On the phone I see Esterel 07:26:14 On IRC I see OCR, csolc, martin, john, ns, amit, jeffs, Beng, Vagner-br, RRSAgent, Zakim, josema, kjetil, trackbot 07:32:05 topic: Input from outiside work 07:32:17 s/outiside/outside 07:34:57 beng: will the asset be fixed once agreed? 07:35:29 Rinke has joined #egov 07:36:01 Amit : this becomes a fcilitating body, is this your role ? 07:36:04 renke: not fixed, the idea is not to change the asset but the connection to the asset from the Member State 07:36:22 Renke : we have another community in ehealth 07:36:35 they just use semic to publish the assets 07:37:06 there is not just hosting, also improve the coaching 07:37:19 martin : have you looked at the mothodology used by xbrl 07:37:37 in particular localization 07:37:46 renken : we use components from un/cefact 07:38:39 we had a presentation yesterday about XBRL + SW at the Plenary (potential XG coming?) 07:38:47 semic is not just spread these concepts, the communities have to decide which methodology they want to use 07:39:01 .. and we publish them, and advise them and indicate envisionned problems 07:39:23 john : for ejustice, can you explain the public policy objective this community is trying to achieve 07:40:03 in the ejustice space there are 27 countries. Why do they want to share this information ? 07:40:56 renke : find the names of companies 07:41:33 how can one handle the different semantics each country has to store company data 07:42:23 martin : eservices directive effective end 2009 (?) to have information on any activity related to a municipality, there is only one point of contact where all companies can get information 07:42:46 the gov organisation must know if the company really exists in order to validate giving them information 07:43:18 renke : the solution from ejustice can be reused in another context 07:43:51 ... collect assets and modelize them, build relations between concepts and rules 07:44:37 .. also a lot of communication, not just technical. 07:44:58 OCR has joined #egov 07:48:46 martin : explain how europe works for people from other countries 07:49:00 john : generalize out 07:49:13 .. there is a set of ppolicy drivers that want to improve the flow of judicial information 07:49:33 i.e., get a parking ticket in france and have to pay it in UK 07:49:48 ... we need information sharing 07:50:03 ... problem : standardazing the judicial system is difficult 07:50:15 ... other route : achieve the policy outcome without going into massive standardization 07:50:30 jeff : are there legal barriers to exchange information accross borders 07:50:33 all : yes 07:50:54 martin : principle : only do centrally what has to be done centrally 07:51:03 .. respect what is already done at local level 07:51:11 ... can only be change on a volontary basis 07:51:22 s/principle/subsidiarity principle 07:51:29 ... europe can not impose anything locally except if its done everywhere 07:51:52 ... semic approach : each of the 27 members states is a black box 07:52:09 Renke : 5200 different sources just in Germany 07:52:37 ... impossible to build a standard in all issues 07:52:55 john : this is an instance of goverments solving G2G information via government action 07:53:16 Chair: john 07:53:24 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/TPAC2008 07:53:36 ... govs have an objective they are not outsourcing 07:53:54 ... need to achieve some sort of degree of information sharing between entities without imposing a degree of standardization 07:54:08 ... and finaly need a mechanism for interoperability : in europe this is Semic 07:54:22 Martin : in socia l security 07:54:50 (this was another example) 07:55:30 amit : intereaction between superannuation 07:55:40 (retirement fund) 07:56:01 john : every nation has a different regime in europe 07:56:44 ... this is more interoperability than standardization 07:57:06 ... q : why chose interoperability over standardization or outsourcing 07:57:34 Oscar : in the long run, if you have common assets, it is easier to achieve internal interoperability and external also 07:57:59 ... stick to what can be done in 12/18 months 07:58:28 john : from apoliticy of sociological point of view standardizaion can be viewed as bad 07:59:01 Jeff : how hard to agree on ontologies 07:59:16 martin : difficult 07:59:28 john : tough when there are deep differences 07:59:33 i.e., common law vs civil law 07:59:59 martin : semantic interoperability : common ontology but not an ontology shared by all organizations 08:00:47 renke : maybe having a large ontology is good, but we wanted to start with practical examples 08:01:09 .. there are already problems inside a state 08:01:19 .. italy, germany : problem of the concept of name 08:01:40 ... find the solution on specific problems, such as "the name concept" 08:02:04 amit : look at link on IRC 08:02:24 www.agimo.gov.au & www.govdex.gov.au 08:02:43 contact brian stonebridge (?) 08:03:02 s/(?)/ 08:03:26 john : the specifics lie in the data 08:03:47 ... do not model the data, look at "note" fields 08:04:01 .. its easier to construct the ontology after that 08:04:13 ... viable approach in a data rich environment such as ours 08:04:26 forensics on existing data... interesting 08:04:46 amit : we use SAP and people have found ways of cheating it already 08:05:10 john : as assets are identified and constructed to capture some part of the process that led to their creating 08:05:13 creation 08:05:32 .. was it analysis of the data or of the model 08:06:00 Renke : 2 different views 08:06:07 1) how to solve technical problems 08:06:20 2) look at what we are doing to find a way of improving the process 08:06:30 ... I can report in a 3/4 months 08:06:57 martin : see where a bottom up method is useful when creating an ontology 08:07:07 ... and find where/when a top down approach is prefered 08:07:14 ... make a comparison and make a decision tree 08:07:45 john : interesting discussion 08:08:01 jeff : is there any citizen resistance to information sharing ? 08:08:10 .. and how is this dealt with 08:08:44 renke : maybe noone really knows what is happening 08:08:48 amit_ has joined #egov 08:08:56 john : very important in the UK 08:09:06 public trust is low at the moment 08:09:19 due to data loss 08:09:40 problems with companies contracted to resolve the issues 08:09:48 ... data is not secure 08:09:58 ... 3 reasons to think about sharing information 08:10:14 identified in the UK Wallport/Thomas review 08:10:40 1) requirement from the social sciences community for longitudinal data sets 08:11:02 ... vast amount of personnal information, to be used to understand what is happening in your society 08:11:07 ... possible to anonymize 08:11:23 2) bring information together to deliver a better service 08:12:11 ... a citizen might want the data access level to change during time i.e., just after getting knocked over by a car 08:12:14 3) national security 08:12:22 ... consent is no longer needed 08:12:45 ... bill going through parliament to keep all emails ever sent 08:13:41 In the web context how can one achieve a degree of data sharing ? 08:13:57 Anonymized data is less problematic. 08:15:25 beng: working on PDS, Personal Data Server 08:15:45 ... secured usb with personal information that gets anonymized 08:15:57 ... but you need some trust identity 08:16:09 ... question: is there a way for an individual to retain the info 08:16:22 ... in order to send it as needed while preserving privacy? 08:16:58 john : use case framework next 08:16:58 topic: Use Cases Framework 08:17:19 ... how do we address the vast number of issues in the egov space 08:17:34 .. what framework to put forward to look at the use cases ? 08:18:32 ... motivation about the simple approach 08:18:50 ... governments role on the web : 3 main areas 08:18:59 this seems to be general everywhere 08:19:08 1) using the web as a mechanism for delivering public services 08:19:29 ... historically : in the 90's not sure what to do, and little by little more services have been added 08:19:54 ... there was no real interaction with the citizen 08:20:08 ... the state is simply throwing out services with various levels of success 08:20:25 2) engage with people 08:20:47 ... rise of social computing, creation of big communities and patterns of behaviour between these communities 08:20:56 i.e., parenting advice 08:21:35 ... if one question is "how to interact with this part of the government service" 08:21:39 see also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2008Oct/0034 08:21:53 ... shouldn't the person responsible of this service also be present in this forum 08:22:21 ... design public services, receive comments and improve them 08:22:56 ... politician get excited by the management of people's experience of their use of services 08:23:44 ... citizen 2 citizen & citizen 2 gov interacction 08:23:57 3) governments sit on a heap of data 08:24:03 ... this is a monopoly 08:24:40 ... govs can send this information in order to create new services 08:24:56 ... question is : what is the role of the state as a "data provider" 08:25:38 amit : this is focused on gov 2 citizen 08:25:53 ... this has policy implications that need to be driven top down 08:26:09 ... the G2G use cases are also challenging 08:26:27 ... interoperability at all levels : city to state, etc 08:27:12 ... in AUS, interested in looking at what has happened around the world 08:27:29 vagner : agree with the 3 areas in general but most govs are only in the first area 08:27:41 ... few in 2nd area, and 3rd is only a possibility ! 08:28:10 ... we need to be ahead on technology, so need to find use cases in 2nd and 3rd, maybe even focus on them 08:28:28 john : govs are better at 1 and G2G 08:28:36 amit : disagree 08:28:45 ... people are interested but it is not a success 08:28:53 +1 08:29:11 ... most gov departments are hierarchical 08:29:11 ?q 08:29:18 q? 08:29:35 thanks jose 08:30:01 ... a lot of innovation needs to happen in order to seen interoperability appear 08:30:09 martin : add to the 1st use case 08:30:22 ... there is no real technical obstacle to impementation 08:31:22 ... govs want to move forwards, they start at technical point, but to move on to a larger scale project, this creates a conflict betwee, technicians and lawyers 08:31:59 ... when making standards mandatory : 1- each aspect of the spec is translated into legal terms 08:32:14 2- say these standards are mandatory and then add them to the law 08:32:30 result : it is clear neither from legal nor technical point of view what needs to be done 08:32:41 proposition : have an intermediate level 08:32:53 divide into technical and non technical issues 08:33:01 creating such a model would be beneficial 08:33:35 john : break 08:33:46 RRSAgent, draft minutes 08:33:46 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-minutes.html josema 09:11:09 scribeNick: amit_ 09:11:30 John: adding government to government as fourth strand 09:11:56 ... engage is new, enable is also new, not much activity in these areas in terms of what gov's do right now 09:12:31 ... the main focus is develop use cases in these two days, and need to figure out what the use cases will be for 09:12:55 ... how detail the use cases need to be? we need to capture successes and failures.... 09:13:03 scribe+ amit 09:13:46 ... how do we capture things that have happen, or new things that few people have implemented? 09:15:00 +1 to identify the target audience 09:15:18 q? 09:15:20 oscar: we need to identify target audience and consumers of information, discuss what we are going to produce as a group and what they are going to use the products (outputs of the group) for.... 09:15:37 john: who is the audience? 09:16:10 q+ 09:16:13 ... our audience is primarily working in gov and also people who are working in gov projects 09:17:14 ... so that they lead the web to its full potential... assume that these people will not be aware of technology knowledge, helping gov people making better decisions about the web... 09:17:35 martin: policy makers, legal expert, political, who are they? 09:18:15 oscar: need to discern between non-tech as well as tech people... 09:18:46 Rinke has joined #egov 09:19:00 john: policy makers (including web policy makers) we should target them... 09:19:20 q? 09:19:27 ack jef 09:20:18 jeff: there is a second audience, ie citizens, 09:20:39 jeff: we need to focus on citizens being able to check up their own personal data that the gov holds... 09:21:01 jeff: this has long run implications for society... 09:22:18 oscar: need to distinguish between local, regional and national level, and should we have targeted messages for each? 09:22:35 q+ 09:22:49 ack amit_ 09:22:50 ack amit 09:23:42 beng: is it about data correction or is it about citizen having impact on gov policy 09:23:46 jeff: both 09:24:06 martin: who owns the information about you? are you or the gov the owner? 09:24:27 oscar: there is also statistical information, eg demographics... 09:24:58 zakim, klaus has just arrived in esterel 09:24:58 +klaus; got it 09:25:25 beng: who owns the data? with a long example that i cant capture 09:26:29 martin: if one has registries and information is being stored, and one needs to use that information, then from the perspective of both gov and citizen, that this information has updated and managed for it's life.... 09:26:38 ... through technology and process 09:27:51 john: there are many catagories, citizen to gov, gov to citizen, gov to gov, we should try and capture one of each of those in our use cases, hence giving us a broad range of unique problems... 09:28:55 s/catagories/categories 09:28:57 martin: there are cases where the gov might be involved or where the community will not be wanted... 09:29:24 john: back to audiences... 09:30:15 ... we have different types of audiences, for each of the above areas... do these people interact or are they a long way away? 09:30:46 ... there are policy people and practioners in each area... do we focus both? 09:31:31 amit: both, in my experience setting up and SDI I had to communicate to both communities 09:32:07 s/SDI/Special Data Infrastucture (SDI) 09:32:11 q? 09:32:37 ... in Australia we have the Office of the CIO, which has a board where all 09:32:41 ... gov orgs come and meet 09:32:55 ... type of authority we should target 09:33:05 s/target/target? 09:33:24 ... then we have AGIMO, sets up technology policy, standards, etc. 09:33:28 ... also to be considered 09:33:57 ... Web is majority component, eGov is broader, they do more than Web wrt technology 09:34:30 martin: is Web goal or means? 09:34:49 ... eGov defines more integration of Services than Web alone 09:35:33 oscar: provide case studies to policy makers... 09:36:17 oscar: pick case studies at the technical level, and then provide methods, standards and pro's and cons about standards 09:36:49 ... also provide areas where new work in standards is required... 09:37:23 now that we discuss about it, I have to remind you of charter scope: "The eGovernment Interest Group (eGov IG) is designed as a forum to support researchers, developers, solution providers, and users of government services that use the Web as the delivery channel. 09:37:53 amit: standards "per se" is not enough, how do I make them useful for a given government? 09:38:34 oscar: need information on how to coordinate between standards... 09:38:39 s/channel./channel." 09:39:04 q+ 09:39:14 ack josema 09:39:20 oscar: we need to highlight scenarios and the use of standards... 09:40:27 jeffs has joined #egov 09:40:29 josema: points to the e-gov standards... 09:41:03 ... gov does not list of standard, but they way they should integrate them... 09:41:25 s/not/not need a 09:41:33 s/standard/standards 09:42:17 oscar: perhaps we can focus our work with a usecase format applied here... and then demonstrate how standards satisfy the usecase and also problems with implementation 09:43:00 martin: what about trying to focus on the migration to WCAG 2? 09:43:58 ... it's very difficult to understand why WCAG 2 is the way it is... 09:44:31 amit: my opinion as former developer, I only want a superficial knowledge 09:44:42 ... not why a Group made a specific decision 09:45:35 josema: the idea behind this group is to identify egov specific issues and then coordinate with other W3C groups to improve other outputs... 09:45:42 ... eg WCAG 2 09:46:50 rinke: agrees with josema, an example is SEMIC's interest and influence W3C standards via this IG 09:47:38 josema: this is a better process, and something that W3C is geared to do... 09:48:08 s/rinke/renke 09:48:45 q+ 09:48:47 john: do we try and construct usecases centric to egov or most digestable to w3c? 09:50:28 josema: we need to focus on egov use cases... 09:51:12 john: which comes back to audiences... egov/web policy makers, practitioners and w3c people 09:51:42 ... do we need to complete the loop between all three? 09:51:45 ack jeffs 09:53:10 jeff: we are talking about process, one way to do this is to minimise discussing thing groups, and focus on what groups things that we should focus on 09:53:30 s/ things/thinks 09:54:43 john: this is helpful, it also means that the use cases that we constructed on our own knowledge and understanding, rather than abstract problems... 09:54:48 q? 09:55:39 vagner: concerned about framework, we need to be concerned about what makes this group unique 09:56:20 amit: that brings us to usecases.. 09:56:24 oops 09:56:26 list of some relevant observatories in Portuguese http://www.observe.org.br/observegov/Default.aspx?idPagina=6330 09:56:58 oscar: we need to understand the deliverables are and by when they will be required... 09:57:23 ... we need as a group to agree on scope 09:58:08 josema: lets focus on developing usecases... some real examples... 09:58:14 http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/Use_Cases 09:59:39 ... persistence use case... gov publishes, URI's, etc, and then something may get lost due to change in CMS or some tech change 10:00:56 john: in the record of Parliamentary proceeding in the UK, only 50% of the of the questions and answers posed are working... (ie hansard) 10:01:33 ... ie the links that document the Q/A of parliament... 10:02:31 ... gov and non-gov citations persistency is about the same, ie gov is doing no better... 10:04:10 ... in 2005 UK gov tested URL references in hansard, and more failed than worked... so persistence is a problem... 10:07:23 ... and rate of citations is increasing, and this happens because, 1. new CMS, 2. structure of gov is not stable ie departments changing url all the time, aggregation and dis-aggregation, at all levels of gov, 3. either a change of minister or political adminsitration.... and political influence to remove and show information.... 10:08:58 martin: this is a general usecase applicable to many areas of work... 10:09:35 q? 10:09:43 amit: maybe the focus should be on provenance of information, and persistence 10:10:12 martin: provenance, temporal and persistance of web information from government 10:10:41 s/government/government (consistency) 10:11:19 q+ 10:12:01 OCR has joined #egov 10:13:38 john: gov is irritated by the broken link problem... and we have a web archiving tool kit, that can be archived centrally. but we did not know what web sites we had... but even getting access to web sites does not help in understanding who own the web sites... we ramped up the archiving and enabled a push mechanism... 10:15:10 ... and we mandated a behaviour, when someone requests a web resource, the user can be served the latest version on the department web site or to the uk gov archive... this was the only way solve the problem centrally... 10:15:41 ... allowing gov web people to play fast and loose, and let them do what they needed... 10:16:06 ... using 301 was a great idea...ie resource has permanently moved... 10:16:32 ... costing UK gov 500,000 Pounds per annum... 10:16:58 ... archived on quarterly basis or an important event basis... 10:17:10 q? 10:17:50 ... also using sitemaps protocol to improve discovery of information on archive (www.sitemaps.org) 10:17:57 ack j 10:18:37 jeff: perhaps we should focus on good practice as well as standards... not just standards... 10:19:21 ... using this case study and explain archival practice... in gov... 10:20:31 jeff: people are trying to do a good job, but unable to do this ... due to lack of knowledge... 10:20:53 john: example is accessible web sites... 10:21:29 ... people developing new accessible web sites and throwing the old inaccessible one away... 10:22:55 jeff: take the 4 interaction models, gov 2 gov, gov 2 citizen, citizen 2 citizen, citizen to gov 10:23:18 ... and develop use cases in these areas 10:24:37 q? 10:25:22 martin: develop usecases and then approach other W3C working groups for feedback and comment... 10:26:14 john: we need to influence w3c of the realities of gov and how they are continously changing, and not part of the cool URI thinking... 10:27:18 john: we have 4 areas, and articulate simple minded ambitions of gov, this needs to given within the business context and the public policy context... 10:27:42 ... and develop usecases and good practice for policy and practioners within gov.... 10:27:57 ... and on this side influence W3C working groups... 10:28:43 amit: good summary 10:31:06 Beng has left #egov 11:35:13 RRSAgent, pointer? 11:35:13 See http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-irc#T11-35-13 11:36:27 amit has joined #egov 11:39:53 OCR has joined #egov 11:44:04 zakim, who's here? 11:44:04 On the phone I see Esterel 11:44:05 Esterel has klaus 11:44:06 On IRC I see OCR, amit, martin, RRSAgent, Zakim, josema, kjetil, trackbot 11:44:46 zakim, klaus left esterel 11:44:46 -klaus; got it 11:51:35 Rinke has joined #egov 11:54:04 BeNg has joined #egov 11:58:02 RRSAgent, draft minutes 11:58:02 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-minutes.html josema 12:00:12 john has joined #eGov 12:03:00 [starting after lunch] 12:03:08 scribeNick:josema 12:03:23 john: recap 12:03:38 darobin has joined #egov 12:03:39 ... four different areas mentioned before in terms of interactions 12:04:12 ... and considered our role and interactions with other W3C Groups 12:04:24 ... in order to identify and pose questions to them to help ground their work 12:04:36 ... in the reality of eGovernment 12:04:58 ... how to communicate with government officials and practitioners 12:05:16 ... if we can identify few cases that could show this, we could succeed 12:05:26 ... (and make govs save some money) 12:05:43 ... discussed one particular use case 12:05:59 ... "cool URIs don't change vs. government does change" 12:06:11 ... is that a fair reflection? 12:06:40 renke: I'd add from SEMIC that some of the projects we have listed there 12:07:01 ... could help the eGov IG as case studies 12:07:11 ... helping them to improve their solutions 12:07:25 ... we are developing a scorecard idea to improve those 12:07:48 ... we are discussing with several projects to find the best solution 12:08:28 ... what could help us is a kind of template to describe this 12:08:37 ... feedback from W3C would be useful in this sense 12:08:58 john: some kind of template to capture it? 12:09:18 renke: yes 12:09:33 john: in this case our role could be to capture your feedback 12:10:07 ... identify W3C areas that are addressed there and act as a channel to discuss 12:10:16 ... with the relevant Groups at W3C 12:10:38 ... then collect that back and document 12:10:52 ... send back to SEMIC/publish it 12:11:09 renke: beyond feedback, give context to other projects 12:11:31 ... so other states working on similar projects could see 12:12:15 ... maybe also bring people to W3C to discuss them 12:13:07 ?? (Nokia): EU very interested in developing this and funding pilot projects 12:13:12 ... any of you involved? 12:14:23 s/??/Lauri Hirvonen 12:15:01 ... big discussion on eID, eg. you need it to make your tax declaration online 12:15:08 ... is that within scope? 12:15:22 john: don't think we could add much value to that 12:15:30 ... given our scope and focus 12:15:40 martin: I can reverse the question 12:15:51 ... and there is relationship with what is going on in EU 12:16:15 eg. cross-participation, liaisons 12:16:39 lauri: several levels of government in Finland, are you take care of all? 12:17:12 john: yes, we have no choice, given the diversity the government has 12:18:22 [people agree] 12:18:54 john: if can make that flow of dialogue happen, that would be good 12:19:02 ... would it help SEMIC? 12:19:19 renke: sounds good to me, I'm happy to go back to IDABC and tell them 12:19:48 john: this could be an approach we could bring to other organizations 12:20:18 martin has joined #egov 12:21:06 liaisons: http://www.w3.org/2008/02/eGov/ig-charter#coordination 12:21:44 and some more at: http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison 12:23:51 josema: two concerns 12:24:42 ... other Group's charters and W3C Membership of participants 12:24:43 http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/faq 12:26:46 john: I can also share how I justified the business decision 12:27:09 ACTION john sheridan to share how he justified the business decision of becoming W3C Members 12:27:09 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - john 12:27:09 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. jwonderl, jsherida) 12:27:20 ACTION johnsherida to share how he justified the business decision of becoming W3C Members 12:27:20 Sorry, couldn't find user - johnsherida 12:27:31 ACTION jsherida to share how he justified the business decision of becoming W3C Members 12:27:31 Created ACTION-14 - Share how he justified the business decision of becoming W3C Members [on John Sheridan - due 2008-10-30]. 12:29:25 josema: very difficult to convince governments because of time commitments issues 12:29:40 john: this model mentioned above could be of use 12:29:52 ... connect initiatives this way 12:30:28 john: we need to make progress on the use cases 12:30:35 ... before adjourning today 12:30:50 ... I can share some of my work at W3C 12:31:05 s/at W3C// 12:31:24 [john introduces Show Us a Better Way] 12:31:51 ->http://www.showusabetterway.co.uk/ Competition Web Site 12:32:05 Vagner-br has joined #egov 12:32:11 ... 100+ ideas that are very good and need more review 12:32:56 s/100/120 12:33:28 ... two key observations: 12:33:51 ... only 20 data sets to make these ideas work 12:34:11 ... huge overlap, in particular: education, health, transport 12:34:35 ... about how the gov can support the citizen to make a better choice 12:34:55 ... public housing, best transportation to go from A to B 12:35:52 ... best place to send kid to school 12:36:16 martin has joined #egov 12:36:20 ... there's also around performance information to get to a service ?? 12:36:58 ... stroke me the disconnection between the citizen and the information the government produces 12:37:11 ... if we could surface performance information in a useful way 12:37:27 ... we can support citizens much better 12:37:55 ... we can now assure based on the competition that much more people had the same idea 12:38:04 ... around this topic 12:40:16 ... a data reuse use case on this topic could be very useful 12:40:30 martin: if you use the approach of asking the citizens what they want 12:41:27 ... similar to what jeffs proposed this morning, then how to present this to the Groups ?? 12:41:47 ... you try to identify sth that is a real problem, using a real problem as an example 12:42:18 ... you need action to solve it, if you get only academic questions then that's not useful 12:42:49 oscar: what is the process of prioritization of services the government puts online? 12:43:11 ... put up there what is possible, what it seems is useful for citizens, what others have done 12:43:24 ... but this topic itself is something not usual 12:44:14 john: why is easier to pick a restaurant or plan your holidays 12:44:22 ... than to pick a school for your kids? 12:44:53 ... if we surface performance data, people will use it in different useful ways 12:45:21 ... will allow to have a better view of the information 12:46:02 ... one clear example, two big Web sites on health where people discuss 12:46:20 ... one run by gov (@@) and one by charity (@@@) 12:49:52 ... different type of engagement, discussions, and big debate is who is doing better job 12:49:52 ... some people feel less moderated in a non-gov forum 12:49:59 ... making the performance available make this services work better, too 12:50:01 s/performance/performance information 12:50:52 [scribe got disconnected from network] 12:52:38 q? 12:52:49 yep 12:52:53 amit_ has joined #egov 12:53:31 RRSAgent, pointer? 12:53:31 See http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-irc#T12-53-31 12:54:25 john: I see many potential benefits 12:55:04 ... it's all about data reuse 12:55:38 ... how do you write the business case of having the gov exposing data but not charging for its reuse 12:55:53 ... even when the benefit is clearly connected to what the government is 12:56:04 ... this is a big concern to policy makers 12:56:23 oscar: what's the cost of not doing so? 12:56:59 john: back to the stds point of view 12:57:24 ... lots of data published already but hidden by proprietary format 12:57:38 oscar: example: eurostat in excel format 12:58:25 martin: some kind of adapter for relational DBs to expose data on the Web? 12:58:32 oscar: DBPedia 12:59:01 ->http://dbpedia.org/ DBPedia 12:59:19 martin: information has been probably lost in the process if that's in Excel format 12:59:32 for an example see: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/companywindingupandbankruptcy.htm 12:59:45 ... how it can be benefitial for govs to present data in a way that is useful for citizens, public servants, 13:00:06 ... things like statistical data 13:00:34 ... how do we create a useful environment in which standards can help achieve this goal 13:01:00 ... probably most out there, needs just to be put together 13:01:35 ... this could be discussed with specific use cases with other Groups 13:01:52 john: that's one example, best example could be something like 13:02:15 ... school performance data available in proprietary format, not easy to reuse 13:02:29 ... from W3C side say that open formats is better choice 13:02:53 ... from govs, if I do so, that will help make my citizens make the choice easier 13:02:57 +owen 13:03:26 another example: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables/ 13:04:59 Owen has joined #egov 13:05:13 [john recaps] 13:05:24 RRSAgent, pointer? 13:05:24 See http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-irc#T13-05-24 13:06:03 RRSAgent, draft minutes 13:06:03 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-minutes.html josema 13:07:34 john: for tomorrow: focus on use cases on one side, good practices on the other and match them 13:07:52 ... and agree on having some of those written up and done by the Group Members 13:08:19 martin: we should settle that we want to be the connector between government organizations and W3C Groups 13:08:36 ... we act as intermediate, too 13:08:52 q? 13:09:05 oscar: propose to make a list of deliverables and plan 13:09:26 ... roadmap for the next months and action people 13:09:32 [all agree] 13:10:09 martin: see if we have enough for the 4 subject areas mentioned today 13:10:23 ... focus on creating the roadmap to create the deliverables 13:10:39 ... more important than the details 13:10:58 john: we'll start with PLING joint meeting, then work on this as proposed 13:11:43 [ALL to think about these areas and prepare for the discussion tomorrow] 13:11:49 [ADJOURNED] 13:11:58 RRSAgent, draft minutes 13:11:58 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-egov-minutes.html josema 13:13:14 -owen 13:13:17 -Esterel 13:13:19 T&S_EGOV()3:00AM has ended 13:13:19 Attendees were Esterel, klaus, owen 13:19:09 renkef has joined #egov 13:29:52 josema has joined #egov 13:46:43 amit has joined #egov 13:54:09 johnsheridan has joined #eGov 14:13:16 Rinke has joined #egov 14:21:38 zakim, bye 14:21:38 Zakim has left #egov 14:22:00 RRSAgent, bye 14:22:00 I see no action items