eGovernment Interest Group Teleconference

15 Apr 2009

See also: IRC log


Sharron, John, Josema, Daniel_Bennett, Owen, Rachel, Ken, Miguel, Kevin, Oscar?
Kendall, Suzanne
John, Kevin
Rachel, Josema


scribe, agenda adjustments

<josema> john: any volunteers?

<josema> scribe: Rachel

<josema> [no adjustments]

any new members around?

[Sharron from Texas is new]

[She posted a message to the listserv about accessibility]

[Intros all around]

[Miguel from Spain is new to the group]

[Miguel has background on IDA, IDABC, EIF, all EC programmes, representing the Spanish Government, also leading NIF effort]

[contributing on Multi-Channel already]

what's going on out there?

Daniel: will be attending eDemocracy camp and Politics Online conference in DC in the next week.
... also working on XML repository schema

<josema> Daniel, I don't remember if I already mentioned I love this piece: http://www.validsites.org/news/somewhat-open-for-questions-some-constructive-criticism

<josema> scribe: josema

<Daniel_Bennett> thanks Jose

<Daniel_Bennett> http://www.validsites.org/

Rachel: co-Chairing U.S. Federal Web Managers Council, our annual conference coming up end of month
... Vivek Kundra and Macon Phillips from The White House to speak and other prominent ones
... also some unconferences going on in parallel
... I'm also on detail at GSA for a while
... at the office that oversees the entire federal government Web

<Daniel_Bennett> wow. on the call at 6am

Rachel: council issued a white paper last fall with recommendations to government
... will post a link to the list

<scribe> scribe: Rachel

[John - mentioned Adobe working to make pdfs accessible for re-use - now an "open format"]

<josema> I would like to ask Rachel about what's in Social Media sites' TOS/Agreement for the federal government (if she can comment)

[kevin asks group what to highlight on interop at upcoming OASIS/TWB event]

<Rachel> GSA TOS press release http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?pageTypeId=8199&channelId=-24825&P=&contentId=25954&contentType=GSA_BASIC

[discussion on how to deal w/pdf into the future?]

[discussion on PDF for digital preservation, PDF/XML...]

[also on how to preserve presentation + data]

<josema> thanks Rachel, read that one, was wondering if the changes to the agreements or the agreements themselves will be made public sometime, could help others with similar needs

<Rachel> yes - they will be shared

<josema> good, thanks!

<josema> agree with Daniel

<josema> scribe: josema

kevin: what to focus on in 20 min?

john: most important change for me: RDFa
... interesting that govs are now focusing on opening up data
... SW technology governments can use today
... recognized I'm biased on this topic
... govt use cases are not always considered in semantic web

<scribe> scribe: Rachel

[definitions for the standards used should be embedded in document]

rachel: We WANT to open up data but technologies are not always available to do this easily
... in order for standards to be used, they must be usable
... easier is better - if it's too hard, people will not do it!
... standards should be developed as building blocks, a solid foundation that can be expanded as needed
... Another strong case for simplicity is - who is the audience that will have to approve them?
... If non-technical folks must approve the standards,
... they must be easy to understand in layman's terms.

<josema> I've said many times there are too many technologies out there already, the particular government need, design pattern, scenario, whatever we want to call, it's what is missing

<josema> and john found a good one where RDFa was the solution, gthomas is going in the same direction, etc.

<josema> the more I think of this, the more I believe it's the way to go for phase 2

<john> likewise josema

<Daniel_Bennett> good point Rachel

<josema> +1, and I believe the document is trying to do that (or was the original purpose at least :)

<josema> [Miguel on multi-channel and integration of both views]

<josema> not to forget on the topic: http://www.w3.org/2008/MW4D/

<josema> [reviews text for paper]

[Miguel on global approach to multi-channel]

<josema> I think we should integrate, broadest view of the topic, also add MW4D more prominently

[how to find/manage government content on non-govt websites?]

<Owen> I need to sign off to participate in the FIRM board meeting: http://firmcouncil.org/id5.html

<john> will ack you next Rachel

<josema> [Owen leaves call]

<josema> scribe: josema

[on YouTube, unmoderated comments, potential risks for children]

Rachel: we are making sure that won't happen on YouTube Gov't channels
... also addressing accessibility, YouTube was/is helpful in working with us and understanding our needs
... we also have the content somewhere else conforming to regulations, etc. YouTube is just another channel
... hope this model will help other govs

Daniel: everybody should publish locally and syndicate widely
... I don't think gov should force YouTube to have special rules for it
... but gov should publish locally in a syndicable format and YouTube should worry about getting content from there

Rachel: putting them also on YouTube people finds them much easier
... they don't think of gov when going there, but find the gov info there
... helps them find the info in the place they use

John: thanks Miguel for the section on Multi-Channel, I see most issues there
... and we need to move forward today to other topics, too

group note issues and pending actions

John: what are next steps RE group note?

Jose: we're compiling comments on draft, making good progress on multichannel
... April 26 - comments due
... "tracker" tool available - all should be using this!
... need to go through & standardize terms (e.g., e-gov, Egov, eGov, etc.)

[issues: http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/issues/open]

Kevin: US govt has an internal deadline of May 21 for open/transparent draft policy
... so we need to have something ready by end of April, if our comments are to be included.

2nd charter and way forward

Jose: 2nd Charter is a separate workload item
... should have charter drafted by mid-May, I'll follow up
... asking for extension on this deadline if all agree, so we can focus on one thing at a time

RESOLUTION: jose to ask W3M for one month extension to publish note, develop 2nd charter

Jose: there are lots of standards already out there, many of which do not work well for government.

Ken: lots of tools out there that are not following standards

Daniel: we should help government find tools that follow standards

<josema> warning: W3C is vendor-neutral, no tools we can recommend

Daniel: W3C should provide a "path" to get to standards, explain benefits. Can't recommend specific tools.

Ken: should address real-world problems by providing a path to standards that will help solve the problem

<josema> UAAG is a good example of what can be recommended: http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG20/

<josema> ATAG, too: http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG20/

<josema> no need to recommend a tool, but to recommend those guidelines and governments could choose compliant tools

John: provide use cases, examples of successful projects, to help others meet their goals
... Next steps - provide comments on group note, and charter
... Thanks, all - lots going on!


Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/04/16 15:09:47 $