<dmcallis> having some challenging internet problems this morning

<josema> still three unknown people ?

<aharvey> I'm aadd

<josema> only two to go!

<josema> kevin, john, I think we should try to identify the other two and go ahead

<Daniel_Bennett> this is eating into the 20min for the "whats going on" agenda item

Agenda adjustments

<josema> [all happy with agenda]

What's going on (events and the like)

Kevin: made a presentation to Federal CIO Committee
... lots going on w/data.gov and open government initiative
... presented Group Note, was asked if NIST is involved in our work.
... some people from NIST attended F2F but no permanent members on IG.
... we need to make sure ...we keep on top of everything happening in govt
... lots of discussion related to metadata and public data catalog
... CIO Council struggling with how to make data discoverable
... Kevin meeting w/George Thomas to follow up (George is on the call today)

<josema> hey george, good to hear you!

George: RDF not well known in gov, also struggling with standardization for linked data

<john> we have that too in the UK

Brand: attended semantic web meeting
... provided some examples of semantic web best practices
... partnering with NIST on interoperability in cloud computing
... planning a semantic web workshop set for September hosted by FDIC

Kevin: update on meeting w/Tim O'Reilly and Kundra, Chopra
... need to present information in a way that managers can understand
... Vivek working on data dashboard
... we have technical info documented, just need to translate to show business value

<josema> I guess semantic web workshop above hosted by FDIC is the XBRL one

Kevin: will follow up with additional action items for year 2

<john> http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-047041801X.html

John: recommend this book
... good "basics" info
... good strategy for group is to point out good work by colleagues around the world
... help each of us build a case within our own communities, if we can demonstrate success by others

<john> everyone ready to move on?

<josema> PdF

Daniel: going to PdF

Kevin: I have a discount code if anyone else wants to register, let me know

<anne> For the record, if not already mentioned, Tim Berners Lee was chosen by PM to lead open gov data in UK

<anne> http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page19579

eGov/Comm Planning Calls and Coordination

John: Chairs have been meeting with W3C folks to coordinate marketing for our Group

<josema> that was me on a _real_ phone, no way to get decent sound today from here :(

Kevin: Looking for opportunities to market our efforts, raise awareness about our work
... avoid recreating the wheel, if others know what we're doing, they can join us
... integrate our work into larger eGov efforts
... O'Reilly summit coming up this fall, 2 members submitted case studies
... they are still calling for Case Studies, but already actually have received more than they have time for
... W3C Communications team helping us research ways to raise awareness of our Group's work

Daniel: Recommends creating a Use Case Library for data-related initiatives
... to help governments standardize data
... one single central place to find out what's being used, and where

Kevin: We do have a library of Use Cases - what to do with them now?

<john> we also talked about a questionnaire - to try and benchmark who is where. Not sure of value of that.

Daniel: "wikipedia" of data from around the world

John: Unless we ensure we are producing quality outputs, we won't gain much traction.
... Need to ensure we produce a coherent "package"

<josema> we also discussed about ETF, mentioned we expected ETF to tweak IG deliverables, still Comm to help us with media opportunities, outreach and the like

John: need to produce a White Paper, Kevin is drafting

Charter and Plan

<josema> Draft Charter 2

John: Kevin posted first draft of Year 2 Charter
... Timeframes very short!
... Need to finalize ASAP, so we can submit before deadline in early July.
... need to be very careful about specific deliverables - can we actually DO those things?

<aharvey> +1 to john's point about deliverables

<josema> I think we need to get this to W3M agenda on July, 15th... 22nd in the worst case scenario

Kevin: Draft posted is just a "draft" - need feedback!

John: Are deliverables realistic? Do they add value?

<josema> my two concerns: actual deliverables and "visualization" TF

Owen: Who is volunteering to take the lead on deliverables? Nothing will happen w/o someone taking ownership

Kevin: Agree

<aharvey> +1 to Owen

<dmcallis> +1 to Owen

Kevin: that's why we need to increase participation - either by adding more members or getting current members more active
... our Group can serve as a bridge betweens lots of other initiatives
... need to get people to commit to actually DOING things!

<anne> +1 Kevin's idea of creating liasons

Owen: Who will be liaison to those other groups?

George: issues with RDFA and HTML5 causing concern

<Zakim> josema, you wanted to _try_ talk about my OGD TF discussions

John:I want to talk to the "html5 guys"

Jose: Working w/W3C communities
... we can have mixed membership - collaborate with other groups to create "design patterns for Open Government Data"
... each individual task force can have its own mailing list, to make communication easier
... agrees w/John about html5 issues
... govt already has many use cases around RDFa to illustrate the value

Kevin: html5 issue being talked about, perhaps we can raise these issues in a larger arena

<josema> I already communicated this to Mike Smith (HTML WG Team contact), will contact him again

Daniel: We want to standardize...but lots of new exciting things always happening

Daniel: our group can help everyone "get along"

<john> just checking charter2 wording, checking this type of issue is in our scope

<josema> ACTION: josema to try get RDFa Gov use cases on TPAC agenda [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/06/24-egov-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-71 - Try get RDFa Gov use cases on TPAC agenda [on José Manuel Alonso - due 2009-07-01].

Kevin: is there a business need that conflicts w/RDFa?

<dmcallis> How do we view competing technologies in metadata, (like XMP) and the wide use of such?

Kevin: not sure our group is doing all we should

<josema> to make my point clearer: I believe OGD is a superset of Linked Government Data, i.e. Linked Data will be a significant part of it but we'll have non-LD use cases

Kevin: this year, there are lots of good opportunities for our Group to make a positive impact

<ocr> +1 to josema, RDFa and OGD

Daniel: important to comply with a standard

Kevin: one of our missions is to partner with others, aggregate best solutions

<anne> Like Kevin's policy of aggregator and not initiator.

Kevin: use cases can demonstrate value
... what new technologies are coming out that are going to evolve into standards?

John: This group is a place where people from MANY governments can get together and discuss common problems

<josema> +1 to john

John: share best practices
... help each other
... eGov IG role is to capture "government" issues and communicate w/those outside of government
... no other W3C group has this same perpective
... regarding Charter 2 - where do we go now?
... do we have the right scope, how widely should we cover the web development area?
... do we want to stay with a broad perspective, or narrow our scope?

<john> wriggle room?

Kevin: important to leave some room to adjust as we go, since things change so quickly
... some issues include accessibility, interoperability

<josema> we have plenty to choose from: http://beta.w3.org/Consortium/siteindex#sitemap (but even that may not be enough wrt visualization)

Kevin: try not to get bogged down, how best to serve the public?

Kevin: sees 3 different broad areas (in addition to open govt data)

<josema> maybe "Web Design and Applications" ?

<aharvey> or "User Experience and Education"

<john> like both suggestions

Kevin: should focus on things that help governments deliver citizen-oriented services

Daniel: looking at "open data" versus "development" - interesting division
... division between those is not always clear

<josema> adam, have you seen http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/owea/ ?

<aharvey> No, thanks for the link Jose!

<josema> all, see namely http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/owea/charter-20090617.html#coordination

Daniel: these 2 task forces need to collaborate where issues merge

John: see link posted by Jose on W3C Open Web Education Alliance Incubator Group

<josema> I'm "guilty" of IG being listed there, forgot to mention it before, sorry!

John: practical ideas for helping govt make the best use of the web

Kevin: need to prioritize what is most important now
... long-term data management and other areas are not our top priority right now
... what is the most appropriate thing for our group to focus on now?

<john> so we do in fact mean "web design and applications"? (to borrow josema's phrase)

<Zakim> josema, you wanted to ask about deliverables

Jose: What are our potential deliverables for these task forces?
... figure out what we want to accomplish FIRST, then decide on the framework to make it happen

Kevin: one thing we want is to publish briefing documents more frequently

<john> so, briefs, memos etc

Kevin: what issues do we want to address in those briefs?

<josema> I was thinking of brainstorming about _real_ examples, can someone give me one?

<josema> is data.gov.* memo one?

<john> that style of communication

Daniel: promoting best practices is a positive goal

<john> broad brush, picking up gov specific context

<josema> ok, I tend to think we all agree that should be the style

Daniel: are we informing best practices in our work products?

<josema> then we need to focus _very_ well Web D* TF, what's in, what's not

<john> topic areas - mobile? accessibility?

<josema> e.g. should be Flash part of that TF?

Daniel: we can give governments the tools to improve their web content/pages

Kevin: What would issue briefs contain?

<john> I would focus on W3C tech - we're not a conduit to adobe / macromedia for flash right?

Kevin: consistency in Group deliverables is important

<josema> do you remember the discussion about "Web content" ? ;)

<josema> I propose: HTML, CSS, Scripting, Ajax, Accessibility, Mobile Web, i18n

<josema> rachel: we are short on time, what's the goal for today?

<josema> ... wrt the Charter?

<john> +1

Kevin: everyone - you have until Sunday to comment on Year 2 Charter
... Chairs will finalize on their call next Wednesday

John: Define deliverables, outline exact topics we want to tackle

<john> are, thanks

<josema> maybe more: what about SVG and Widgets?

Kevin: will send out list of w3c groups, need to identify those with which we need to collaborate

<josema> Privacy? Math?... list goes on

<john> my vote, widgets yes, svg no

<josema> ok

<josema> I'm trying to take into account what Kevin mentioned about not "too restrictive"

Rachel: are you looking for volunteers at this point?

Kevin: First let's make sure we have the Charter done, then we can get volunteers.

John: Although we need to make sure that the elements in the Charter are within the purview and interests of Group members, so we can get volunteers to tackle these issues.

<Daniel_Bennett> a11y, i18n, HTML, CSS, ECMA, Cool URLs, CSS Media formats including print and mobile, Citations/Anchors/XPointers

Kevin: still looking for more members
... we do have good folks on the group now, but can always use more help!

<josema> daniel, I would put Cool URLs, Citations/Anchors/XPointers on OGD TF, concentrate here more on the "Webapp/visualization" aspect

<john> I'm not in favour of wishful thinking in the charter (ambition, but also realism)

<dmcallis> After the new charter, does a F2F make sense? Easier to involve new members with a concrete meeting.

Kevin: don't want to set expectations without being able to deliver on them.

<josema> tip: read Charter 1 again, concrete, but not so much, so we had room

John: can we assume that we structure Charter 2 from the baseline of where we are today

Kevin: impressed with level of engagement on the listserv this past week

<josema> I again regret to have missed previous call :(

John: Comments on Charter 2 due Sunday. Issues resolved, Charter finalized next week.

<Daniel_Bennett> Jose, we miss your actual voice on this one

<kevin> Jose agree with Daniel keep expecting to hear your voice

<josema> daniel, kevin, see draft and listserv, I added many comments in there!

<Daniel_Bennett> ok

<josema> scribe: josema

Editorial Task Force

rachel: ETF to bridge policy/technology gap
... several volunteers contacted me already
... sent draft proposal to listserv
... anybody read it?

<aharvey> I read it.

<aharvey> I liked it :)

<dmcallis> I read it... haven't had time to digest or respond

john: talked about this with Comm
... Comm very interested in learning what exactly ETF would do
... we mentioned ETF will help us reach those we _need_ to reach as a group

kevin: strongly agree

brand: semantic web for dummies book

<john> we can resolve this as our way of working, right?

josema: please add ETF to draft charter

rachel: will do

daniel: should a mention of ETF be added to other groups, so it is clear that deliverables go thru ETF before publication?

kevin: ?? something like that would be awesome

<Owen> http://www.amazon.com/Semantic-Web-Dummies-Computer-Tech/dp/0470396792

<Daniel_Bennett> yes, thanks Rachel

<aharvey> no objection

john: anybody objects to this way of working?

RESOLUTION: deliverables to go to ETF before publication

<dmcallis> thanks, all

[IG ADJOURNED - ETF team stays]

rachel: daniel, I like your idea of adding ETF mention to other groups
... in terms of editing work, we mentioned editing window of 2 weeks
... my plan is to ask people to volunteer depending on topic

daniel: we can have exceptions, also keep media in mind

<Rachel> differentiate between "press" pieces and documents "for publication"

[some discussion about how the relationship between Comm and ETF should work]

rachel: ETF happy to review and help, defer to jose how it should work

josema: I'll try to have you joining an eGov/Comm call to discuss about it
... we are all in same boat and with same goal, very easy to understand each other

adam: we can test out ETF procedures and coordination on the current note, since it's revision isn't a priority

[scribe missed owen's question]

daniel: publish our "standards" for writing style, etc. and make people aware of this

rachel: next steps, comments on Charter 2 are due on Sunday
... suggestions, please use wiki
... also white paper, we should have that fairly soon

<Daniel_Bennett> have people giving deliverable to ETF to note who the authors are to allow ETF to contact authors

rachel: white paper should be our first deliverable
... we could even divide up in pieces to work in parallel

adam: sounds good

rachel: I want to thank you all again for volunteering
... this is a passion of mine
... happy to have you joining me for this

<aharvey> we think you're great too Rachel.

rachel: really appreciate it, even before starting

<Daniel_Bennett> Strunk and White

rachel: daniel, I'll try to put together those "standards" we'll use
... if any of you are interested in reworking any piece of the Note just tell me

<aharvey> MLA?

rachel: let's communicate by email

[ADJOURNED]