13:59:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #egov
13:59:47 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/12/17-egov-irc
13:59:53 <josema> trackbot, start telcon
13:59:57 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:59:59 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be EGOV
13:59:59 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see T&S_EGOV()9:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
14:00:00 <trackbot> Meeting: eGovernment Interest Group Teleconference
14:00:00 <trackbot> Date: 17 December 2008
14:00:07 <josema> chair: john, kevin
14:00:15 <josema> regrets: owen, martin, kjetil
14:01:02 <josema> regrets+ rinke
14:01:09 <josema> zakim, who's here?
14:01:09 <Zakim> T&S_EGOV()9:00AM has not yet started, josema
14:01:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, josema, Rachel, trackbot, kjetil
14:01:16 <Zakim> T&S_EGOV()9:00AM has now started
14:01:23 <Zakim> + +1.202.488.aaaa
14:01:25 <josema> zakim, call josema-office
14:01:25 <Zakim> ok, josema; the call is being made
14:01:26 <Zakim> +Josema
14:02:05 <josema> zakim, aaaa is chris
14:02:05 <Zakim> +chris; got it
14:02:11 <Zakim> + +1.509.464.aabb
14:02:48 <josema> aabb is rachel
14:02:57 <josema> zakim, aabb is rachel
14:02:57 <Zakim> +rachel; got it
14:03:41 <john> john has joined #eGov
14:04:55 <Zakim> +john
14:06:59 <josema> scribe: josema
14:07:46 <josema> agenda+ agenda adjustments
14:07:56 <josema> agenda+ outline of document
14:08:04 <josema> agenda+ open actions
14:08:07 <josema> agenda+ next meeting
14:08:21 <josema> agenda?
14:08:46 <josema> josema: scribing as usual... oh, well...
14:08:50 <josema> agenda?
14:09:12 <kevin> kevin has joined #egov
14:10:07 <josema> zakim, move to next agendum
14:10:07 <Zakim> agendum 1. "agenda adjustments" taken up [from josema]
14:10:35 <josema> john: any?
14:10:56 <josema> josema: reminding people of dates and location of 2nd F2F 
14:11:04 <josema> ... proposed 12-13 March at AIA in DC, USA
14:11:09 <chris> chris has joined #egov
14:11:13 <josema> ... please, send feedback
14:11:16 <josema> chris: good for me
14:11:42 <josema> rachel: good for me, hope I could find funding to go there
14:12:33 <josema> john: please, let us know if we can help to justify the importance of the trip
14:12:41 <josema> zakim, move to next agendum
14:12:41 <Zakim> agendum 2. "outline of document" taken up [from josema]
14:13:14 <josema> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/Group_Note
14:14:03 <john> josema: we have outline, not spectacular yet, outline taken from relevant messages from mailing list, use cases and wiki
14:14:54 <john> josema: difficult to categorise the issues, we have many different dimensions of view
14:16:08 <john> josema: some conversation are out of scope for W3C as policy related. Aim to show how to use W3C standards in a good way
14:16:48 <john> josema: every use case is relevant in several areas, then we repeat the dimensions problem
14:19:00 <john> josema: example with transparency - not a technical topic, so changed to open government data
14:19:47 <john> chris: whatabout social media - how to nail that from policy versus standards?
14:21:07 <john> chris: we could surface, what are standards that underpin web 2.0 sites
14:21:39 <john> chris: want to see building of the business case for those at policy level
14:23:19 <josema> john: another relevant point is how government can make good use of this
14:23:29 <josema> ... 2.0 stuff to do better decision making
14:23:52 <josema> ... SE taking over EU Presidency, it's my understanding they have much interest on this
14:24:02 <josema> s/SE/Sweden
14:24:18 <josema> ... endorses the point you are making, problem is not about technology
14:25:02 <john> chris: how does W3C look at social media issues?
14:26:14 <john> josema: what if you are putting video on youtube, then you have issue with content accessibility
14:26:30 <john> josema: what about data portability?
14:27:21 <john> josema: these issues have been discussed for 3 years in W3C
14:28:02 <john> josema: depending on views of members, will be a basis for charter
14:28:16 <josema> rachel: I'm having hard time separating policy from standards
14:28:33 <josema> ... in the US, new government will make greater use of these tools
14:29:20 <josema> ... maybe we should also consider the idea of what is doable and what is not?
14:29:45 <josema> ... 2.0 is all about enabling, how to help government structure their data so that allow people
14:29:59 <josema> ... to access that data to find the answers to their questions
14:30:08 <josema> ... help people to help themselve
14:30:14 <josema> s/themselve/Themselves
14:30:19 <josema> s/T/t
14:30:34 <josema> john: agree, difficult to separate, very related
14:30:50 <josema> ... but in terms of the Note, what do we want as headings?
14:31:06 <josema> ... policy-like vs. more technology-like
14:31:14 <josema> ... I can give example
14:31:30 <josema> ... say US gov has to decide what information to keep ling-term, what to destroy
14:31:50 <josema> ... two public policy objectives, that may be contradictory
14:32:33 <josema> ... keeping as less as you can vs. keep as much as you can
14:32:47 <josema> ... you can use technology to help you any of those
14:33:33 <josema> ... our hope is as a W3C Group, to start with technology and go up to the policy area
14:33:53 <josema> ... eg. you can use this technology to fulfill this policy goal, this way
14:34:26 <josema> chris: going through the draft, we should state this somewhere in the draft
14:34:35 <josema> ... as early as possible in the document
14:35:11 <josema> rachel: yes, sometimes we want to do this or that but is not doable because of a given regulation
14:35:17 <josema> chris: agree
14:36:01 <josema> [john goes through areas in the draft]
14:37:15 <josema> [also about perceived hierarchy]
14:38:36 <john> josema: the structure is based on personal experience talking to people
14:40:49 <john> josema: outreaching type documentation has been very useful in past from W3C point of view
14:41:50 <john> josema: most people reading documentation won't necessarily have in depth understanding
14:43:06 <john> josema: we also have lots of vocabulary issues - people using different language for same idea/concept
14:44:04 <john> josema: documentation broader than developers, more project managers etc.
14:44:35 <john> rachel: we need reference points - what things are and why
14:45:25 <john> chris: this is why we should take business case point of view
14:45:56 <john> josema: use use cases to highlight real projects using this or that technology
14:46:35 <josema> regrets+ ari
14:47:00 <john> chris: potentially restating business problem, then use case in that context
14:47:23 <john> chris: focus on the problems
14:48:54 <john> josema: is on hols from tomorrow - aim to have one or two sections finalised for group to see
14:49:51 <Zakim> + +1.202.626.aacc
14:50:13 <john> rachel: put open gov and engagement to the top
14:51:17 <john> chris: terminology important, use terms that will attract people
14:53:16 <josema> zakim, aacc is kevin
14:53:16 <Zakim> +kevin; got it
14:53:30 <josema> [rachel leaves]
14:53:33 <Zakim> -rachel
14:53:56 <josema> john: interesting thing for me is two hot topics prioritized
14:54:08 <josema> ... engagement and open government data
14:54:32 <josema> ... which does not mean there are lot of people working on the other issues
14:55:09 <josema> ... one selling point for OGD is our use of RDFa, that also helps solve some interoperability problems
14:57:50 <josema> [jose explains back/front of Multi-Channel delivery]
14:58:04 <josema> chris: better to use "access" than "delivery"
14:58:18 <josema> john: I've learned something there, in the UK context we talk about delivery
14:58:45 <josema> ... we even have a Council named after that, working of the kind of issues jose mentioned
14:59:00 <josema> ... so, yes, we have a Delivery Council working on that
14:59:34 <josema> chris: maybe we need both there
15:00:32 <john> josema: we need textual description of all the topics
15:00:46 <john> josema: do we prioritise?
15:00:53 <john> the topics
15:01:57 <josema> chris: participation, OGD, interop, Long term, Auth, Multi-Channel
15:02:05 <josema> ... if I had to prioritize
15:02:46 <josema> john: I would agree with first three, probably then do: Multi-channel, Auth, Long term
15:03:08 <josema> ... but can we wrap Auth something else? eg. Multi Channel?
15:05:53 <josema> chris: +1 to john's
15:07:30 <josema> josema: +1 to start with those
15:07:45 <josema> chris: and try to come up with more user friendly terminology
15:11:43 <josema> kevin: have several things drafted on paper, will work on the computer
15:11:56 <josema> ... and deliver something in a week or so from today
15:12:19 <josema> john: I will send something on the deadline or around it
15:13:13 <josema> josema: it's difficult to write the doc without the use cases
15:13:27 <josema> john: optimistic about setting up the deadline, hope more cases by then
15:14:52 <josema> chris: do we have anyone working on long term?
15:15:02 <josema> ... I could write some on persistence
15:19:43 <josema> trackbot, comment ACTION-34 chris to write a high level
15:19:43 <trackbot> ACTION-34 Document "Handle" use for THOMAS as use case for 2.Persistent URIs notes added
15:22:36 <josema> kevin: I'll meet with TimBL on January, if you have anything for me to say, please let me know in advance
15:23:35 <josema> john: one: how do we encourage governments to do some stuff TimBL believes they should do?
15:23:52 <josema> ... e.g. duty to publish open data
15:24:06 <josema> ... part of where our Group is
15:30:31 <josema> zakim, move to next agendum
15:30:31 <Zakim> agendum 3. "open actions" taken up [from josema]
15:30:37 <josema> [skipping this one]
15:30:44 <josema> zakim, move to next agendum
15:30:44 <Zakim> agendum 3 was just opened, josema
15:30:49 <josema> zakim, move to next agendum
15:30:49 <Zakim> agendum 3 was just opened, josema
15:30:54 <josema> zakim, close this agendum
15:30:54 <Zakim> agendum 3 closed
15:30:55 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:30:57 <Zakim> 4. next meeting [from josema]
15:31:07 <josema> zakim, move to next agendum
15:31:07 <Zakim> agendum 4. "next meeting" taken up [from josema]
15:44:53 <josema> s/kevin: I'll meet with TimBL on January, if you have anything for me to say, please let me know in advance//
15:45:11 <josema> s/john: one: how do we encourage governments to do some stuff TimBL believes they should do?//
15:45:35 <Zakim> -kevin
15:45:42 <Zakim> -chris
15:45:45 <Zakim> -john
15:46:09 <josema> s/... e.g. duty to publish open data//
15:46:13 <josema> s/... part of where our Group is//
15:46:23 <josema> zakim, list attendees
15:46:23 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.202.488.aaaa, Josema, chris, +1.509.464.aabb, rachel, john, +1.202.626.aacc, kevin
15:46:29 <josema> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:46:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/12/17-egov-minutes.html josema
15:47:32 <josema> [next meeting: 7 Jan; 14:00Z]
15:47:36 <josema> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:47:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/12/17-egov-minutes.html josema
15:48:17 <josema> zakim, drop me
15:48:17 <Zakim> Josema is being disconnected
15:48:19 <Zakim> T&S_EGOV()9:00AM has ended
15:48:20 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.202.488.aaaa, Josema, chris, +1.509.464.aabb, rachel, john, +1.202.626.aacc, kevin
15:48:28 <josema> zakim, bye
15:48:28 <Zakim> Zakim has left #egov
15:48:32 <josema> rrsagent, bye
15:48:32 <RRSAgent> I see no action items