IRC log of egov on 2009-05-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:55:53 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #egov
12:55:53 [RRSAgent]
logging to
12:55:59 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #egov
12:56:22 [josema]
chair: john
12:56:32 [josema]
regrets+ suzanne
12:56:43 [davemc]
Good afternoon. I'll only be on IRC today
13:00:56 [Owen]
Owen has joined #egov
13:00:58 [josema]
hi, dave, ok, apologies in advance for scribing today, too many things I'll have to take care of, sorry
13:01:04 [josema]
trackbot, start telcon
13:01:06 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:01:08 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be EGOV
13:01:08 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see T&S_EGOV()9:00AM already started
13:01:09 [trackbot]
Meeting: eGovernment Interest Group Teleconference
13:01:09 [trackbot]
Date: 06 May 2009
13:01:16 [josema]
zakim, who's here?
13:01:16 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P17, john, +1.509.464.aaaa
13:01:18 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Owen, Zakim, RRSAgent, josema, davemc, John, trackbot
13:01:22 [Daniel_Bennett]
Daniel_Bennett has joined #egov
13:01:52 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.236.aabb
13:02:00 [Owen]
I'm on the phone also via Skype
13:02:18 [Zakim]
13:02:26 [josema]
zakim, martin_s is me
13:02:34 [Zakim]
+ +1.202.319.aacc - is perhaps Owen?
13:02:49 [Zakim]
+josema; got it
13:02:52 [Daniel_Bennett]
202 319 is Daniel
13:02:53 [josema]
zakim, who's here?
13:03:04 [Zakim]
On the phone I see ??P17, john, +1.509.464.aaaa, +1.202.236.aabb, josema, Owen?
13:03:08 [josema]
zakim, aacc is Daniel_Bennett
13:03:13 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Daniel_Bennett, Owen, Zakim, RRSAgent, josema, davemc, John, trackbot
13:03:15 [Zakim]
sorry, josema, I do not recognize a party named 'aacc'
13:03:25 [davemc]
I'm sitting in a Ecma meeting arguing about IP policy, anyone want to trade?
13:03:43 [josema]
zakim, Owen? is Daniel_Bennett
13:03:43 [Zakim]
+Daniel_Bennett; got it
13:03:51 [John]
IP policy? nice :)
13:04:15 [josema]
zakim, ??P17 is probably Owen
13:04:15 [Zakim]
+Owen?; got it
13:04:33 [josema]
zakim, who's here?
13:04:34 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Owen?, john, +1.509.464.aaaa, +1.202.236.aabb, josema, Daniel_Bennett
13:04:36 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Daniel_Bennett, Owen, Zakim, RRSAgent, josema, davemc, John, trackbot
13:05:15 [Zakim]
13:05:56 [josema]
scribe: josema
13:06:02 [josema]
open issues:
13:07:33 [josema]
zakim, aaaa is Rachel
13:07:33 [Zakim]
+Rachel; got it
13:07:40 [Sharron]
Sharron has joined #egov
13:07:48 [josema]
zakim, aabb is Brand
13:07:48 [Zakim]
+Brand; got it
13:07:54 [josema]
scribe: Sharron
13:07:58 [Rachel]
Rachel has joined #egov
13:09:04 [josema]
zakim, who's here?
13:09:04 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Owen?, john, Rachel, Brand, josema, Daniel_Bennett, Sharron
13:09:07 [Zakim]
On IRC I see Rachel, Sharron, Daniel_Bennett, Owen, Zakim, RRSAgent, josema, davemc, John, trackbot
13:10:04 [Sharron]
Jose: Open issues , we can go through them and some are connected to open actions for publishing the docuemnt.
13:10:28 [josema]
regrets+ kevin
13:11:03 [Sharron]
John: OK, let's go through them one by one, starting with Issue 2, item 55
13:11:20 [Sharron]
Jose: still pending and without Kevin on call, we can't do much.
13:11:36 [Sharron]
John: Issue 4 still open, on me.
13:11:53 [josema]
[ISSUE-2: kevin working on it]
13:12:06 [josema]
[ISSUE-4: john to send text today]
13:12:09 [Sharron]
should have in monutes/hours Jose from me
13:13:08 [Sharron]
Daniel: Sent final edits based on last set of suggestions re: Issue 17, safe to play
13:13:18 [josema]
[ISSUE-17: daniel just sent section text with safe to play comments added]
13:15:13 [Sharron]
Jose: I will review and try to integrate, were you able to address Malcolm's concerns?
13:16:05 [Sharron]
Daniel: I did not adopt the exact language but did incorporate ides, especially about citizens not being overwhelmed, phishing, having confidence in systems.
13:16:53 [Sharron]
...addressed role of govt identity and authentication, so think it meets the concerns that were raised.
13:17:25 [Sharron]
Jose: Daniel...any way to review the new text?
13:17:53 [Sharron]
Daniel: On Google docs you can look at revision history which will highlight changes and compare to previous.
13:19:04 [Sharron]
John: Issue 22, examples of participation and engagement...
13:19:23 [Sharron]
Daniel: I have offered to add paragrpah or two...will get it in today.
13:19:28 [josema]
[ISSUE-22: daniel to review in a few hours time]
13:19:42 [Sharron]
[Issue 22 Daniel to submit today]
13:20:20 [Sharron]
John: Kevin and Suzanne have been reviewing and revising the doc.
13:20:31 [Sharron]
Rachel: Need help with plain language?
13:20:50 [Sharron]
John: I don't know. Are we there yet? nearly there?
13:20:52 [josema]
[ISSUE-22: daniel to review and submit today]
13:21:16 [josema]
-> Editor's Draft
13:21:26 [Sharron]
Rachel: Introduction is snapshot where good talking points are...getting there, happy to help.
13:21:36 [Sharron]
...touch base with kevin?
13:21:49 [Sharron]
John: More we polish intro better for whole doc.
13:21:52 [josema]
13:22:07 [Sharron]
Rachel: I am ready to help, tho have been very busy recently
13:22:25 [Sharron]
John: Having read others things you've written, you would be good at that.
13:22:47 [Sharron]
Rachel: Tahnks most people are taught to write too much.
13:23:07 [Sharron]
Daneil: If you can distill the into, perhaps distill to single tweet.
13:23:16 [Sharron]
Rachel; Yes we need that
13:23:20 [josema]
that would be interesting to see
13:24:20 [Sharron]
Sharron: Need clear langeuage
13:24:41 [Sharron]
Jose: Needed by tomorrow.
13:25:04 [Sharron]
John: Issue-30 comments of EOWG
13:26:08 [Sharron]
Jose: It was good to recieve their comments and they have been useful. Wish there was more time to coordinate with all the W3 groups and expect to do that in future draft. We agreed to put comments into editor's draft verbatiom.
13:27:13 [Sharron]
...slight wording changes as draft has continued to be edited. But not significant changes. One issue was that Judy Brewer had raised about plain language etc.
13:27:57 [Sharron]
...EO would like to see another draft, but time does not allow since it is in constant revision. It is not possible with the time involved.
13:28:06 [Zakim]
13:28:30 [josema]
13:29:14 [Sharron]
Sharron: I was at EO meeting Friday, I reported that there would not be another draft and suggested that folks watch the draft in progress and comment.
13:29:45 [Sharron]
Jose: I told Judy that if she had further comments, we would need to hear from her by yesterday.
13:30:17 [Sharron]
...Group expects that while this is not perfect, it will be good and as we go forward we will continue to imporve.
13:32:02 [Sharron]
John: Need to be aware that while we can't do the perfect thing, we need to do a useful thing and take a step forward. I endorse Jose view that if we feel we have an insightful, useful document and that we have given our best shot within our constraints of time and volunteer effot, we should go forward. It is an important decesion.
13:32:45 [davemc]
+1, if carefully positioned correctly
13:33:52 [davemc]
thank you, Sharron (ofcourse this means you all don't have to tolerate me interrupting
13:33:56 [Sharron]
John: What are the publishing timelines and why do they exist?
13:34:28 [John]
I think I've lost phone connection?
13:34:34 [Sharron]
Me too
13:34:39 [Owen]
I'm hearing music
13:34:39 [Sharron]
Hearing music
13:34:40 [Daniel_Bennett]
nice music
13:34:44 [Sharron]
13:34:52 [John]
ok, so we all have the same
13:35:07 [josema]
is that me?
13:35:07 [Daniel_Bennett]
13:35:28 [Owen]
Shall we dance?
13:35:38 [Daniel_Bennett]
quick bathroom break
13:35:43 [josema]
'm hanging-up in case it's me
13:35:45 [Daniel_Bennett]
or coffee
13:35:51 [John]
13:35:55 [josema]
zakim, drop josema
13:35:55 [Zakim]
josema is being disconnected
13:35:56 [Owen]
TMI, Daniel
13:35:57 [Zakim]
13:36:01 [davemc]
not me!
13:36:06 [josema]
no more music?
13:36:07 [John]
it was josema
13:36:13 [josema]
sorry :(
13:36:32 [Zakim]
13:37:18 [Sharron]
Sharron: If any way possible, would suggest a delay of jsut a few days for review and consensus about narrative flow
13:37:36 [Sharron]
John: What are the publishing timelines and why do they exist?
13:38:30 [Sharron]
Jose: May 21 was deadline set in coordination with Obama memo.
13:39:04 [Sharron]
...we decided to adopt that as our deadline as well. OSTP needs at least a week to review to see how it relates.
13:40:31 [Sharron]
...docuemtns can only be published at W3c on Tu Th with one day notice. So we were targeting the 12th. Which means we had to complete by the 8th. Since I have to convert to HTML and test throu W3C protocols I need another day. So to meet these deadlines I need all text by tomorrow.
13:41:21 [Sharron]
Jose: Of course, we can change it, but have been discussed and decided to try to meet that deadline.
13:41:51 [Sharron]
John: Yes just wanted to review the opportunity and the need to produce something to make best use of that opportunity.
13:41:58 [josema]
13:42:08 [josema]
13:42:52 [Sharron]
...core issue is whether the work we have with the work still in progress meet the goal of producing something useful and meet the opportunty?
13:43:46 [Sharron]
...I think being in the right place at the right time is important. It is not the perfect thing but we have produced soemthing that has utility and that I have not seen anywhere else. I am happy and confident to have my name associated with this.
13:44:17 [Sharron]
Owen; So being able to participate in the broader national conversation is improtant.
13:44:31 [Sharron]
Daniel: Yes we will miss opportunities if we put it off.
13:44:33 [josema]
13:44:50 [Owen]
Sharron, I did not make the comment just attributed to me.
13:44:57 [davemc]
agreed, go forward.
13:45:08 [josema]
I've just fixed it, Owen
13:45:21 [Sharron]
...we have a great compendium of information in this one document that addresses these issues adequately if not perfectly.
13:45:30 [Owen]
I think the test that John mentioned, i.e., that he would like to have his name associated with the draft, is a good one.
13:45:53 [Owen]
I'm not sure I could make the same assertion because I haven't seen the latest draft.
13:46:19 [Sharron]
John: Rachel, from your persepective how close do you think it is?
13:46:31 [davemc]
+1 Owen
13:46:36 [josema]
Owen, latest draft is always up at:
13:46:41 [davemc]
Would like to review a near-final
13:46:50 [josema]
eight now it only misses "new" Daniel's text
13:46:58 [josema]
13:47:17 [Sharron]
Rachel: Personally I always try to meet the deadlines I set and I agree with caution that while it is not perfect, it is better to put it out there and open for broader opinion.
13:47:49 [Owen]
Thanks for the clarification, Jose. My impression was that the latest draft was not yet sharable.
13:48:29 [Sharron]
John: We have learned big lesson that trying to cover EVERYTHING about egov in one document may not have been the wisest thing. We may not want to say it in the document, but among ourselves, we may plan more focussed, polished pieces.
13:48:51 [davemc]
still concerned about negative references.
13:48:53 [Sharron] 24 hours must get us to a draft that is sharable.
13:49:16 [josema]
dave, *please* tell me where you spot some
13:49:21 [Sharron]
Owen: We should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. We should put it out there for further comment.
13:49:28 [davemc]
Management of contents that cannot be showed in a mobile device, have a large size very costly to download and memory consuming (images, PDF documents).
13:49:38 [davemc]
I think iPhone, RIM show the opposite
13:49:57 [Sharron]
John: Can close Issue-30
13:50:40 [Sharron]
John: Issue-34 is one raised by Judy and we talked about this one and have gone a long way toward addressing it.
13:51:20 [Sharron]
Jose: I remeber that Judy proposed to have accessibility as a headline topic that would show in the table of contents and at this point we have two.
13:51:53 [Sharron]
...most of sections include at least some accessibility references.
13:53:40 [Sharron]
Sharron: Current document does good job of separating accessibilty for PWD and access to government by all citizens.
13:53:51 [Owen]
Having just scanned the latest draft, I'm not sure I could agree this statement is true: Government agencies in the United States use the term voluntary consensus standards according to [US-OMB119].
13:53:52 [josema]
[ISSUE-30 and ISSUE-34 can then be closed]
13:54:19 [Sharron]
John: Let's move on to Issue-35
13:55:09 [Sharron]
...Jose, is that the best way for us to proceed? close Issue-34?
13:55:32 [Owen]
It has been two years since I retired, but when I left goverment, the prevailing definition of "standard" was a personal proprietary product preference (P4).
13:55:36 [Sharron]
Jose: I heard from Sharron that accessibility is well covered, so yes.
13:56:07 [Sharron]
John: As long as we have on the record that we have considered, discussed and conluded that it is sufficinetly addressed then we can close it.
13:57:08 [Owen]
P4 + the political power to impose upon others (P6IO)
13:57:18 [Zakim]
13:57:24 [Owen]
correction P6IOU
13:57:45 [Sharron]
Jose: So Issue-35 is about the comments from VSA. We have a lawyer at W3C who has advised about the difference between open source and open standards.
13:57:53 [josema]
13:58:26 [Zakim]
13:59:26 [Sharron]
...I think we are good on that front because we have recognized various interpretations of terms, Europe/US differences, etc. BSA wants a distinction made and wants no endorsement in this document for open standards.
13:59:27 [Owen]
correction to correction P6IUO
14:00:07 [Sharron]
Jose: Have others reviewed the comments? We should be clear about our meaning, not have endorsements.
14:00:40 [Sharron]
Ken: There is section after Open Standards called Open Source Solutions...?
14:00:55 [Sharron]
14:02:01 [Sharron]
Daniel: That language could be cleaned up to say whenever possible docuemtn models should be based on open standards whether open source or proprietary.
14:02:02 [davemc]
that's a can of worms.
14:02:54 [Sharron]
Owen: Important distinction to be made between open data and open software. The open data is most important.
14:03:20 [Sharron]
Daniel: I will tweek the language to be very neutral.
14:04:13 [Sharron]
John: Issue-36 is next.
14:04:54 [Sharron]
Daniel: Yes this one is mine I put this out on the National Dialogue but got some blowback. It may be too soon for this idea. We can close this one.
14:05:14 [Sharron]
John: Any other issues that we can address that have not yet?
14:05:38 [Sharron]
Daniel: Or issues that still need to be raised.
14:07:09 [Sharron]
Jose: Issue 2 is still open pending reciept of new text. 15 the same, 17 have the text, need to integrate; 35 agreed but must respond to BSA and see if it acceptable to them; Rachel offered help with Issue 24
14:07:52 [Sharron]
Rachel: Yes I am working on it now
14:08:18 [davemc]
ohank you
14:08:35 [Sharron]
Rachel: I will have it to you at the end of the day
14:09:17 [Daniel_Bennett]
Jose, first the music, now echo chamber
14:09:35 [Sharron]
Jose: Kevin is writing an Exec Summary. So we will have Intro, Background, Abstract, Status of Document...many sections that are summary sections
14:10:06 [Sharron]
...maybe should coordinate with Kevin. We have many sections that deal with the same general thing.
14:10:25 [Sharron]
John: In next 24 hours we should close all the issues if everyone does what they have said.
14:11:02 [davemc]
I may have missed it.. resolution on "open data and open software" ?
14:11:04 [Sharron]
Jose: Many issues were left from the F2F meeting
14:11:26 [davemc]
focus on open data, I hope
14:11:45 [josema]
14:11:57 [davemc]
14:12:35 [Owen]
I believe the "Semantics" paragraph would be improved by appending this sentence: Toward that end, it would be beneficial to publish on the Web in readily sharable, referenceable format the names and definitions of elements currently being used, regardless of the scope of agreement that has been achieved.
14:12:38 [Sharron]
Sharron: Glossary will be submitted in HTML format by EOD today
14:13:21 [Sharron]
Jose: Personally not sure if I can work on document tomorrow but will make final edits Friday and send to list.
14:13:37 [Sharron]
...first thing Saturday will send message to webmaster.
14:13:52 [Sharron]
John: Good to have a window to review glossary, etc
14:14:55 [Sharron]
Jose: Do you have additional concerns, Owen?
14:15:24 [Sharron]
Owen: OMB policy and reality around standards is different.
14:15:39 [Sharron]
...wording currently in draft is incorrect.
14:16:43 [Sharron]
...also in semantics paragraph, I disagree that goal is shared semantics. Rather provide defintitions internally for semantics.
14:17:15 [Sharron]
...can do better by sharing our own smantics in readily sharable format like XML
14:17:37 [davemc]
but not limited to XML.
14:18:20 [Sharron]
Jose: Am marking document is sections you refer to. Didn't you have email exchanges about that?
14:18:40 [Sharron]
Owen: Yes we had put placeholders in the draft.
14:19:21 [Sharron]
...current wording is not correct. OMB circular directs agencies to use voluntary consesus standards
14:19:31 [Sharron]
...not correct to say that is what they ARE doing.
14:21:33 [Sharron]
Jose: I can make those changes
14:22:09 [Sharron]
John: Another case where even if not in complete agreement, better to publish waht you mean.
14:22:51 [Sharron]
Owen: With those changes, happy to have name on doc.
14:23:25 [Sharron]
John: Any other actions to cover today?
14:23:48 [Sharron]
...Let's take next 7 minutes and apply them to our tasks. OK?
14:23:53 [Sharron]
All: Yes
14:23:55 [davemc]
14:24:13 [Sharron]
John: Thanks for all this work on what will be an important and useful document, we are adjourned.
14:24:15 [Zakim]
14:24:15 [Zakim]
14:24:18 [Zakim]
14:24:20 [Zakim]
14:24:20 [Zakim]
14:24:22 [davemc]
davemc has left #egov
14:24:26 [josema]
14:24:28 [Zakim]
14:24:46 [josema]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:24:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate josema
14:26:04 [Zakim]
14:26:05 [Zakim]
T&S_EGOV()9:00AM has ended
14:26:06 [Zakim]
Attendees were john, +1.509.464.aaaa, +1.202.236.aabb, +1.202.319.aacc, josema, Daniel_Bennett, Owen?, Sharron, Rachel, Brand, Ken
15:51:39 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #egov
16:00:28 [josema]
rrsagent, stop