- From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:39:44 +0100
- To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
- Cc: John Sheridan <John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk>, Kevin Novak <kevinnovak@aia.org>
All,
Draft minutes of the second day of the first face to face meeting are
at:
http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes
and copied as text below.
-- Jose.
----------------------------------------
- DRAFT -
eGovernment Interest Group Meeting - Day 2
24 Oct 2008
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-irc
Attendees
Present
oscar, john, martin, benjamin, josema, renke (most)
ralph (part), klaus (part), karen (part), owen (part), trond
(part)
Regrets
Chair
john
Scribe
josema, rigo, carine
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]joint meeting with PLING
2. [5]plan, deliverables and specific use cases
3. [6]discussion of big topic areas
4. [7]your Web site is your API
5. [8]what data?
6. [9]participation in social media
7. [10]level of detail, roadmap, plan
* [11]Summary of Action Items
_________________________________________________________
joint meeting with PLING
<josema> scribeNick: josema
renato: chair of PLING, joint meeting to discuss about potential
overlap
... social networks also in scope for us as an interesting case to
look at
... also people from PrimeLife EU project
... also policies that can impact human activity on the Web
rigo: I think we have identified the need for a general ?? framework
that should interest govs
... where you can push general policy on your data records that
travel
... so you'll know about that data in the future
... general policy constraining?? framework
... we need more use cases
renato: we need to capture the needs of the larger community
rigo: also experience with large scale use cases
john: we too are working on use cases
... we spend our time thinking about 4 types of interaction: G2G,
G2C,...
... whole of stuff that is going on around the Web, some wrong
... very simple stuff that needs to be improved
... discussed about use of performance data, how to improve policy
outcomes in some areas
... describe that with use cases in those areas
... eg. G2G needs more data sharing
... G2C important issue of how people uses data that the government
produces
renato: is this documented?
john: we are starting, group is young
... but starting to document already
... some things are very difficult, scope is broad
... understanding the landscape takes time
... data sharing is massive, almost any kind of public policy
outcome
... needs this, there are legal challenges, also challenges around
errors
... eg. to transfer the data between two departments, there was the
need to use a CDRom
... that was lost in the transaction
??: that is a problem I found already because of the policy itself??
scribe: certification and law in place should help improve
thisAndreas
... there also ideas of modifying processes, methods, etc.
... we need to make sure the certification bodies to take care of
this asap ??
john: from UK perspective, we don't have two levels but many to
classify material
... problem changes the higher we go, higher end covers eg.
intelligence community
... you'd think it'd work well at that level, but there also
problems there
... another approach is the risk of having the info public or not
... one person's tax record might not be that interesting but 25
million is different
... also approach to take into account
... we commissioned a data handling review and for the first time
... every gov dept had to identify their data assets and one person
responsible for them
andreas: and you make a person liable for gov data?
john: no, conversations are happening on how to deal with it
... we probably need new legislation in place to deal with this
lucy lynch: are those "persons" redundant? if not it's a single
point of failure
rigo: enforcement by stamp, one of the issues that we have is that
when developing those use cases
... you have to very strict, perhaps a piece of data in a DB
somewhere dissapears and it's spread among many
... different systems, like in a graph
... how would you re-construct it? find it?
[scribe lost some]
jan: interesting question, how W3C can be relevant to solve some of
these issues
... you can probably do better than losing those 2 CDs
... what's the scope of eGov at W3C here?
rigo: from PLING side we need to be able to represent the
constraints that governments have
andreas: you need a system to help the person managing the asset
... W3C could help putting a framework in place
... that could be a relevant UC
... if you have the system set up, the responsable owners of the
asset have a chance to deal with it
john: to give you a sense of scale, in just one department in the
Ministry of Interior
... there are one hundred people that are "data owners"
rigo: I already see this concept about the silo that one owns
... once the silo disappears everything change
john: do you want to solve today's or tomorrow's problem?
rigo: I want to solve today's problem with tomorrow's solution
andreas: ??
rigo: you can make some things harder, eg. obscurity
... but having a reliable one is a different story
... ???
[discussion about enforcement of data handling with DRM on gov data]
[...and whether making such secure system is possible]
john: there are social, cultural changes involved, too
rigo: may be technically possible, but would render system unusable
renato: government as consumer use cases would be interesting, too
... eg. consumers applying for something and making sure the info
... is being kept private by gov
... also user entering data like in social network, but in gov
context
john: big piece of our concern
... public trust is about the way gov keeps the info
??: how to express consent in gov systems to be able to share data
for better service
... especially personal data
... some can be done with anon data
john: you need to share that info between departments, taxes, social
security
... you need to introduce the concept of citizen consent
... the citizen consents the gov to use it to provide him/her a
better service
Jan Schallaböck: in Germany there's the concept where every agency
... needs to ask the citizen forpermission to use it
martin: in NL the case is the opposite
... we have identified two levels related to eID: user/pwd and SMS
sent to your mobile
... depending on the kind of transaction
rigo: we discussed that yesterday, ENISA wants to have an ontology
... on security levels, which is arbitrary at the beginning
... and people define as they go
... they want to define some protocols at the beginning
... so you could identify the security levels at the beginning and
??
... this is a discussion that will happen no matter the security
level
... ???
js: common criteria already provides levels of security
... that's the kind of stuff I'd like to see in govs
... if a guy is in charge and the only one with permission to access
the data
... I wouldn't like to see other accessing it
...identify first the object of audit
rigo: with common criteria auditing, we could transform the
population of China into
... ISO @@ consultants
... issue with common criteria is that it does not scale, it's
impractical
martin: in the NL the software to handle login by IDs are developed
in open software
john: there's one more issue I'd like to draw
... ?? initiative about DRM
... even basic data sets could be an aggregration of various
properties
... and have to make them reusable on the Web
renato: I agree
john: then you can have the government use CC like in NL, NZ
... we have something similar but need to go beyond that given our
needs
... we are using RDF and RDFa for that
martin: CC needs to be translated into dutch legal framework if we
want to use it
rigo: I faced this issue about the translation before: in Germany
... issues about the attribution, who writes, who translates...
renato: you mentioned UK government about what's missing, some
document available?
john: the underlying license we have seems to be better for the
lawyers that are examining it
... presentation of CC is ok, but the underlying license we have
seems to be much better
js: go adapt CC UK, had the same issue with GPLv3 and addressed with
them
john: where we license for free, we have a comprehensive one before
CC was issued
... now who is supposed to follow who?
...can start by linking licensing stuff with ontology
....IP issue of third party rights, from re-use perspective has to
take that into account
rigo: with the labeling framework we have in mind this is something
you could do
john:the use of RDFa might solve these problems
... using RDFa in semi automated structure, testing if combinantion
of data creates new data base rights
rigo: eg. using RDFa to describe the license of this and that part
of a given document;
... one of my concerns is why is everybody following the CC wagon?
even W3C
... because it makes people's life easier to understand the basic
text and not thousands of lines
renato: and they only offer a few of those with names that are easy
to understand
... even by non-experts
jan: they still own the trademark, they have the updating process
and control
john: licensing system for the public sector have to permit
commercial reuse, this is very important
... because if not the PSI sector could die
rigo: if you take geolocation as example, in US you pay, say $10 for
using it
... in EU you fly over and photograph again and it's still cheaper
than pay for use
renato: great conversation, hope useful for both groups, let's keep
in touch and share info
john: agree
[mini break]
plan, deliverables and specific use cases
john: let's start with the most interesting topic areas for use
cases so far
... policy with respect to data sharing
... and property rights expression
... also something around "your Web site is your API"
... ways for people to reuse data and enable data reuse
... something which is more a policy issue is what kind of framework
gov might have to make decissions
... about what data should be released and how
... another one on participation of public officials in social media
and in C2C conversations
jose: discuss these topic areas before going into detail with focus
on policy or technology
martin: add identification and authentication issue there
beng: also about the different levels of "visibility" of the data
and how a citizen can communicate information and if that can be
reusable or not ??
john: 1) G2G data sharing
... 2) "your Web site is you API"
... 3) licensing rights expression to enable reuse
... 4) what government data does the Web need?
... eg: mapping
... how do make that decision and what business models you should
use?
beng: how do you envision the contribution of the Group in this
area?
john: take a step back, see what's out there and how
martin: eg. do you want to rely on Google mahsups for such an
information?
... very simple question, maybe difficult to answer
... and government agencies have better mapping info
john: 5) participation in social media
... 6) identification and authentication
beng: 7) aggregation but also timing, until when you'd be able to
use it
martin: ??
oscar: long term archiving, there are different requirements in the
physical archives world
... in the digital world there are differences, but you need to look
into the challenges
... should I encrypt? until what extent? until when that digital
signature will last? etc.
martin: we should add the migration from hard copy to digital
... to that case
john: 8) digital preservation
beng: and you must be able to destroy info when law says that
??
john: paper world also has the single place storage and ???
martin: that's the 3rd item, maybe not significant for eArchiving
????
john: census data compiled in the UK every ten years
... but only released every 100 years
... if we had to digitize we'd need loads of money because the data
is so big
... how this could work in the future?
... digital continuity project is about middle distance, eg. ensure
you could get the info in 15 years from today
... also the issue of autheticity is of importance, still open
questions
oscar: we might want to ask the XML DSig people
martin: issue I have is that stuff made this way seems to be done
... for instant use, may be broken in the near future ?????
oscar: issue I see is that we are doubling the number of bytes every
year
martin: you need to have a new signature attached before the old one
expires
jose: many EU govs are archiving their documents in proprietary
formats
... in spain you as a citizen have a right to communicate with the
gov in any format you want
... you can send a word doc digitally signed they need to archive
... and they cannont touch the doc for integrity reasons
martin: can they print it out?
oscar: what happens to the signature?
jose: no clear answer to these issues yet
martin: in NL documents can be re-signed
<john> You may like to see:
[12]http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/electronicrecords/digitalcont
inuity/default.htm
[12] http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/electronicrecords/digitalcontinuity/default.htm
john: government does not keep emails for long
... some may have trivial info, but some may be very useful
... eg. to understand the social networks public servants have
... how they relate, and government could do network analysis and
improve its business
martin: exactly the answer why you should not convert a Word doc
into PDF and just store the PDF one
... there are historical aspects involved
... I'm interested in digital workflow of the docs
beng: how are the documents are re-sign?
martin: both things are separated and linked, signature is renewed
[discussion is leading to trust again]
john: you can scope the size of conspiracy you need
... in the digital world you can spread the info to as many places
as needed
... and inject that info here and there
beng: but if it's sensitive data you might not want to have millions
of people getting that data
john: authenticity is for good while sensitivity degrades over time
martin: there are many aspects around this that need to be looked
into
... we need to conclude this is a big concern, and we don't have the
solutions
... we need to raise this with other Groups
john: I think I can also commit my organization to produce a first
draft for the Group to discuss
... it touches on our core business
[BREAK]
<martin> the link:
[13]http://www.forumstandaardisatie.nl/fileadmin/OVOS/Exploring_auth
entication__EN.pdf
[13] http://www.forumstandaardisatie.nl/fileadmin/OVOS/Exploring_authentication__EN.pdf
<john> We have a similar system in the UK:
[14]http://www.gateway.gov.uk/
[14] http://www.gateway.gov.uk/
discussion of big topic areas
[topic areas on starting flipchart:
[15]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/eGov_flipchart_start.jpg]
[15] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/eGov_flipchart_start.jpg
[[transcription:
(Use Cases, Topic Areas of Interest and Relationships Affected)
(relationships may be not final, showing main ones)
1. Semantic Interoperability (eg. Judicial) (G2G)
2. Persistent URIs (G2C)
3. Performance Data + Citizen Choice (G2C)
4. Data Sharing Policy Expression (G2G, G2C, C2G)
5. Digital Preservation + Authenticity (G2G, G2C)
6. IPR Expession (G2G, G2C)
7. Identification + Authentication (G2C)
8. Data Aggregation + Temporal Degradation (G2G)
9. Your Web Site is your API (eg. RDFa) (G2C, G2B)
10. What Data? How does the government decide? (G2B, G2C, C2G)
11. Participation in Social Media; what are the rules ? (C2C)
]]
[reviewing one by one]
[taking up 7. Identification and Authentication (G2C)]
[attendants to focus on F2F discussion, scribing will be more
summarized]
john: issue that we have authentication systems for government
interaction, but not for other web transactions
[actions to show what is solved and what is not, from the government
point of view]
RESOLUTION: 7. Identification and Authentication (G2C) to capture
how it's working right now and how the complex problems related to
G2G data sharing work to deliver a seamless authentication
experience to the citizen
<john> different problems for businesses...
<josema> ACTION: martin to elaborate on what exists wrt 7.
Identification and Authentication (G2C) [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action01]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action01
<trackbot> Created ACTION-15 - Elaborate on what exists wrt 7.
Identification and Authentication (G2C) [on Martin Mollema - due
2008-10-31].
[taking up 8. Data Aggregation and Temporal Degradation (G2G)]
[discussion on how the government guarantees the citizen how the
data is stored and shared]
[also about eVoting and some flaws in systems]
<john> On electronic voting:
[17]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhMUtzOxjJY
[17] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhMUtzOxjJY
<john> titled "the American voting system HACKED"
[eVoting as an example in this topic area]
[there might be a need to build some systems thinking from the
beginning in non-retrivable information]
[should we divide into two and add temporal degradation to digital
preservation?]
[all agree]
RESOLUTION: move temporal degradation from 8. to 5. digital
preservation
[some discussion about rewriting story]
[we need something about temporal change of data, different from
degradation]
RESOLUTION: add 12. Temporal Data: legislation/legal and geospatial
ACTION benjamin to find use case on eVoting to illustrate 8. Data
Aggregation
<trackbot> Created ACTION-16 - Find use case on eVoting to
illustrate 8. Data Aggregation [on Benjamin Nguyen - due
2008-10-31].
[some topics don't need much discussion now, since they were
discussed yesterday and it's on the record]
[in some cases we'll need to raise the issues and not show solutions
yet]
[need to find route for SEMIC.EU to provide 1. Semantic
Interoperability]
[some people in the Group are also interested in helping with this,
but not present, ask in next call]
[3 is quite related to 9]
[for 9. and data mashups in general see
[18]http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/faq#q9]
[18] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/faq#q9
[LUNCH]
[renke left esterel]
<john> Before we resume, you might like to see [19]article about the
Minister on better data management
[19] http://www.civilservicenetwork.com/news/article.html?tx_ttnews
[tt_news]=56852&tx_ttnews[backPid]=20&cHash=21d372ab2a
<scribe> ACTION: josema to find route for SEMIC.EU to be engaged in
the IG and provide cases for 1. Semantic Interoperability [recorded
in [20]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action03]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action03
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - josema
<scribe> ACTION: jsherida to find use case to illustrate 2.
Persistent URIs [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action05]
[21] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action05
[Created afterwards by trakcbot as ACTION-31].
ACTION oscar to find use case for number 9. your web site is your
API
<trackbot> Created ACTION-18 - Find use case for number 9. your web
site is your API [on Oscar Azanon Esteire - due 2008-10-31].
ACTION martin to find use case for number 9. your web site is your
API
<trackbot> Created ACTION-19 - Find use case for number 9. your web
site is your API [on Martin Mollema - due 2008-10-31].
ACTION jsherida to help with use case for number 9. your web site is
your API
<trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Help with use case for number 9. your
web site is your API [on John Sheridan - due 2008-10-31].
[no ACTION yet for 4. Data Sharing Policy Expression, review later]
<scribe> ACTION: jsherida to find people within the organization to
build use case to illustrate 5. Digital Preservation + Authenticity
+ Temporal Degradation [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action07]
[22] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action07
<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Find people within the organization
to build use case to illustrate 5. Digital Preservation +
Authenticity + Temporal Degradation [on John Sheridan - due
2008-10-31].
<scribe> ACTION: unassigned to find use case on 6. I.P. Expression
unassigned [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action08]
[23] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action08
<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Find use case on 6. I.P. Expression
unassigned [on Unassigned - due 2008-10-31].
<scribe> ACTION: unassigned to [no ACTION yet for 2. Data Sharing
Policy Expression] [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action09]
[24] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action09
<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - [no ACTION yet for 2. Data Sharing
Policy Expression] [on Unassigned - due 2008-10-31].
[should we use the TF structure?]
<scribe> ACTION: oscar to Elaborate on what exists wrt 7.
Identification and Authentication (G2C) [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action10]
[25] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action10
<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Elaborate on what exists wrt 7.
Identification and Authentication (G2C) [on Oscar Azanon Esteire -
due 2008-10-31].
<john> On RDFa you may like to see:
[26]http://www.talis.com/nodalities/ and check out the article "Call
to arms"
[26] http://www.talis.com/nodalities/
<scribe> ACTION: unassigned to 10. What Data? How does the
Government Decide [recorded in
[27]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action11]
[27] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action11
<trackbot> Created ACTION-25 - 10. What Data? How does the
Government Decide [on Unassigned - due 2008-10-31].
<mamol> I have contacted IDABC to check whether RDFa might be a
useful addition to the research currently undertaken on Open
Document Exchange Formats, which primarily focused on comparison of
ODF and OOXML
<scribe> ACTION: unassigned to 11. Participation in Social Media
(what are the rules?) [recorded in
[28]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action12]
[28] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action12
<trackbot> Created ACTION-26 - 11. Participation in Social Media
(what are the rules?) [on Unassigned - due 2008-10-31].
<scribe> ACTION: benjamin to work on 12. Temporal Data:
legislation/legal and geospatial [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action13]
[29] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action13
<trackbot> Created ACTION-27 - Work on 12. Temporal Data:
legislation/legal and geospatial [on Benjamin Nguyen - due
2008-10-31].
<scribe> ACTION: jsherida to work on 12. Temporal Data:
legislation/legal and geospatial [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action14]
[30] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action14
<trackbot> Created ACTION-28 - Work on 12. Temporal Data:
legislation/legal and geospatial [on John Sheridan - due
2008-10-31].
<john> UK Gov guidelines on participation on social media:
[31]http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/iam/codes/social_media/participat
ion.asp
[31] http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/iam/codes/social_media/participation.asp
[more detailed discussion is needed on 9, 10 and 11]
your Web site is your API
<john> We talked about fixmystreet: [32]http://www.fixmystreet.com/
[32] http://www.fixmystreet.com/
<john> as an example NGO in this area
[Owen joins by phone]
<Owen> I like the discussion that is taking place now about
performance metrics.
oscar: this is about the capacity the government has to put the
information
... available to *everybody*, difficult to say if it's G2C, G2B...
... lots of implications, too (eg. DRM, IPR...)
[john mentioned RDFa as an example of the way to go]
[john reminds the Group of the UK eHealth case and the two sites
"serving" health-related info]
[oscar on implications about prioritization]
<john> We mentioned patient opinion:
[33]http://www.patientopinion.org.uk/
[33] http://www.patientopinion.org.uk/
href="http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/"[martin shows a case in
NL]
[on government Web guidelines testing]
<Owen> Jose, it is good to see that some folks have volunteered to
do some work on some of the use cases.
<jose> yep!
<Owen> With reference to Action 25, in the U.S. the EFOIA Amendments
require agencies to make available any records that are requested by
anyone and likely to be of interest to three or more citizens. It
also requires agencies to take reasonable steps to make information
available in whatever form it is requested, e.g., XML.
[usually testing 20 pages/site, 16 government sites??]
[oscar on artificially created rankings to "sell" the solution]
<jose> I may remind you of the slides I used on Wed. with my other
hat on: [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/TPAC/CMS_CTIC/
[34] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/TPAC/CMS_CTIC/
<Owen> The EFOIA amendments are in bold text at
[35]http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_XVII_4/page2.htm
[35] http://www.usdoj.gov/oip/foia_updates/Vol_XVII_4/page2.htm
<trackbot> ACTION-25 10. What Data? How does the Government Decide
notes added
[martin on the potential of showing errors to governments using
tools like this]
<mamol> the test on the quality of websites
[36]http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/test/
[36] http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/test/
<mamol> The normative document with the rationale behind the
webguidelines:
[37]http://www.drempelvrij.nl/media/20070720%20-%20Normative_documen
t_Webguidelines_1_0.pdf
[37] http://www.drempelvrij.nl/media/20070720%20-%20Normative_document_Webguidelines_1_0.pdf
[jose on finger pointing is not that good]
karen: from a Comm point of view, I'd use blogs, abstracts for
conferences and give presentations
... voice opinion of the Group there
... I'll look at opportunities and find matches for you, but need
content
oscar: we are still now discussing on audience, format, etc.
<Owen> With reference to Use Case 3, section 202(b)(1) of the eGov
Act requires U.S federal agencies to "develop performance measures
that demonstrate how electronic government enables progress toward
agency objectives, strategic goals, and statutory mandates."
[38]http://xml.gov/documents/completed/eGovXML.htm#202
[38] http://xml.gov/documents/completed/eGovXML.htm#202
john: after the break, we'll go through the two points left
... 10. What Data? and 11. Participation in Social Media
<scribe> ACTION: jsherida to work on 3. Performance Data and Citizen
Choice [recorded in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action15]
[39] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action15
<trackbot> Created ACTION-29 - Work on 3. Performance Data and
Citizen Choice [on John Sheridan - due 2008-10-31].
[BREAK]
what data?
[john on ways/cost of putting PSI assets online]
oscar: what is the cost of not putting it?
martin: some aspects are in laws and gov orgs need to fulfill them
john: agree, it's very common
... what it really interests me if what is value added of doing this
... how to surface information that are deeply hidden and it's of
value
oscar: how can you be sure it's used in the right way?
john: also, if you do it, how much it does get reused
martin: looking at it from a legacy point of view, I think you could
find many areas
... where the gov info is made available for a fee, and it has to do
with the publication process
... the decision once made to charge for it may now be reconsidered
john: can we articulate the case for serendipitous reuse by the
government?
<Owen> The folks at Princeton have argued that access to .gov info
should be less about "publishing" it and more about making the raw
data itself available in readily shareable format.
oscar: we need to find examples, one step at a time, and it's
important to get out the message
martin: if you try to create it SW-based and you find a situation
where you are not in control
... you might find yourself in a vendor-locking situation
... eg. data you store in a social media site
<Owen> In the U.S. the Federal Records Act requires agencies to make
and keep records and the E-FOIA Amendments require them, within
reason, to make those records available in whatever format
requested.
<jose> requested by whom? a citizen? a government agency? anybody?
<Owen> SOA is a grossly overused term, but if it means anything, it
means making data available in readily shareable format.
<Owen> There is no need to make this issue complicated. The upshot
is that all public information should be made available in readily
shareable format.
<Owen> The issue is how best to measure and report to citicens how
well or poorly their governments are sharing the public information
with which they are entrusted.
jose: we should mention that is good to publish in open raw formats
... but also note the concerns that can arise and should be taken
into consideration
john: it's really hard to make the policy case
<Owen> Jose, I'm going to need to sign off shortly. I'll look
forward to finding other opportunities to contribute to the IG's
outputs in the future. As previously expressed, I find F2F meetings
very frustrating. I hope this one proves to be more productive than
most of those in which I've been involved.
<john> Thanks for your participation Owen
jose: we can use existing cases from the outside
karen: your discussion reminds me of one I had on Health Care and
the creation of an ecosystem
[oscar brainstorming using flipchart]
<john> Is this helpful?
[40]http://powerofinformation.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/more-architec
ture/
[40] http://powerofinformation.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/more-architecture/
[on Linked Data to show the way here? we would need to "redraw" the
cloud in government terms]
<scribe> ACTION: josema to talk to the DBPedia people/Ivan Herman
about using the Linked Data/DBPedia approach for 10. [recorded in
[41]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action16]
[41] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action16
Participation in Social Media
[discussion about different approaches in several countries]
[the NZ blogging policy:
[42]http://yes2privacy.wordpress.com/2008/03/15/blogging-civil-serf-
and-pseudonymity/]
[42] http://yes2privacy.wordpress.com/2008/03/15/blogging-civil-serf-and-pseudonymity/
[the UK Participation online guidance:
[43]http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/iam/codes/social_media/participat
ion.asp]
[43] http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/iam/codes/social_media/participation.asp
[about the benefits vs. the risks and how the risks should be
identified and addressed, but shouldn't prevent the government from
using it]
<Karen> [44]http://www.w3.org/2008/09/msnws/
[44] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/msnws/
[let's try to send a position paper to the workshop]
<jose> My attempt at symplifying the whole thing in a [45]graphic
[45] http://www.w3.org/2008/Talks/0604-Brazil-JA/Slides#(10)
[on LAFD Twitter]
karen: you might want to run a survey to prioritize your list of
topics
... and publicize it in different ways
<scribe> ACTION: jsherida to draft position paper for W3C Workshop
on future of social networking [recorded in
[46]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action17]
[46] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action17
<trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Draft position paper for W3C Workshop
on future of social networking [on John Sheridan - due 2008-10-31].
level of detail, roadmap, plan
jose: which level of detail? should we just compile the use cases?
address issues?
martin: pragmatic approach, focus on use cases and act as channel
Govs<->W3C Groups
john: I would prefer a narrower time frame, maybe taking
contributions until end November
... publish first WD before Christmas
... review of existing use cases proposals in the wiki is not done
yet
... but they are more technical than our topic areas here
... we've been focus on the corpus of the material we should create
as Group
... than to go in depth
[topic areas assigned to TFs in flip chart; see
[47]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/eGov_flipchart_final.jpg]
[47] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/eGov_flipchart_final.jpg
[ADJOURNED]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: benjamin to work on 12. Temporal Data:
legislation/legal and geospatial [recorded in
[48]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action13]
[NEW] ACTION: john to find people within the organization to build
use case to illustrate 5. Digital Preservation + Authenticity +
Temporal Degradation [recorded in
[49]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: john to find use case to illustrate 2. Persistent URIs
[recorded in
[50]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: jose to find route for SEMIC.EU to be engaged in the
IG and provide cases for 1. Semantic Interoperability [recorded in
[51]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: josema to find route for SEMIC.EU to be engaged in the
IG and provide cases for 1. Semantic Interoperability [recorded in
[52]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: josema to talk to the DBPedia people/Ivan Herman about
using the Linked Data/DBPedia approach for 10. [recorded in
[53]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action16]
[NEW] ACTION: jsherida to draft position paper for W3C Workshop on
future of social networking [recorded in
[54]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action17]
[NEW] ACTION: jsherida to find people within the organization to
build use case to illustrate 5. Digital Preservation + Authenticity
+ Temporal Degradation [recorded in
[55]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: jsherida to find use case to illustrate 2. Persistent
URIs [recorded in
[56]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: jsherida to work on 12. Temporal Data:
legislation/legal and geospatial [recorded in
[57]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action14]
[NEW] ACTION: jsherida to work on 3. Performance Data and Citizen
Choice [recorded in
[58]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action15]
[NEW] ACTION: martin to elaborate on what exists wrt 7.
Identification and Authentication (G2C) [recorded in
[59]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: martin, josema to draft position paper for W3C
Workshop on future of social networking [recorded in
[60]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action19]
[NEW] ACTION: oscar to Elaborate on what exists wrt 7.
Identification and Authentication (G2C) [recorded in
[61]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action10]
[NEW] ACTION: oscar, martin, josema to draft position paper for W3C
Workshop on future of social networking [recorded in
[62]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action18]
[NEW] ACTION: unassigned to 10. What Data? How does the Government
Decide [recorded in
[63]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action11]
[NEW] ACTION: unassigned to 11. Participation in Social Media (what
are the rules?) [recorded in
[64]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action12]
[NEW] ACTION: unassigned to [no ACTION yet for 2. Data Sharing
Policy Expression] [recorded in
[65]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action09]
[NEW] ACTION: unassigned to find use case on 6. I.P. Expression
unassigned [recorded in
[66]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action08]
[48] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action13
[49] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action06
[50] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action04
[51] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action02
[52] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action03
[53] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action16
[54] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action17
[55] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action07
[56] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action05
[57] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action14
[58] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action15
[59] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action01
[60] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action19
[61] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action10
[62] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action18
[63] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action11
[64] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action12
[65] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action09
[66] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-egov-minutes.html#action08
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [67]scribe.perl version 1.133
([68]CVS log)
$Date: 2008/10/27 15:36:26 $
[67] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[68] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
--
Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org> W3C/CTIC
eGovernment Lead http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/
Received on Monday, 27 October 2008 15:40:50 UTC