SV_MEETING_TITLE -- 03 Feb 2010

<ChrisBeer> Sandro - do we have an agenda for this meeting at all?

<sandro> I'm about to send out. Kevin was supposed to chair but cancelled. :-(

<ChrisBeer> kk - I'm here, just in another program. back in 30 for meeting

<sandro> scribe: jose

<josema> scribe: josema

<Daniel_Bennett> probably snow day here in washington dc area

sandro: chairing this one myself since Kevin couldn't finally make it

<sandro> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2010Feb/0031.html

administration

sandro: main point is to hear john about data.gov.uk

<sandro> minutes http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/meeting/2010-01-20

sandro: any comments about the minutes?

[none heard]

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/Meetings

scribe: next meeting in two weeks
... need a scribe volunteer, please?

<sandro> scribe volunteer?

<george> regrets for next meeting - out of the country

<karen> +1 Ed

<sandro> next scribe: EdSu

[Ed volunteers to scribe on 17 Feb]

sandro: any comments about agenda today?

<luigi> hi all

karen: any updates around Comm, outreach and conferences?

Action Item Review

sandro: sure, when talking about news, etc.

<ChrisBeer> back

<sandro> action-14?

<trackbot> ACTION-14 -- John Sheridan to share how he justified the business decision of becoming W3C Members -- due 2008-10-30 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/14

sandro: john on sharing business case to become W3C Members

john: yeah, still on me

sandro: want a deadline?

john: not a bad idea, let's say that in 2 weeks time (17 Feb)

sandro: ok

<sandro> action-76?

<trackbot> ACTION-76 -- José Manuel Alonso to address funding issue -- due 2009-12-31 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/76

josema: not working on it anymore, should be better on the Coord Team

<sandro> action-89?

<trackbot> ACTION-89 -- José Manuel Alonso to explore the feasibility of various European venues and conference collaborations and propose specific dates -- due 2009-09-16 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/89

josema: it's about finding a way forward in terms of funding

<sandro> josema: I tried to schedule a F2F in Brussels in December, but it was complicated by other events, so that was postponed. I wanted to do something TimBL could attend.

<karen> q

<karen> +1 around key events

<sandro> close action-89

<trackbot> ACTION-89 explore the feasibility of various European venues and conference collaborations and propose specific dates closed

josema: maybe better to schedule around events in DC in March, I don't see how to make this happen in EU in the short term

<sandro> action-95

General Announcements, News

sandro: will try to do by next week??

<sandro> - RDFa Working Group begins

<Daniel_Bennett> +q

sandro: a new group has been launched on RDFa, embedding RDF in HTML pages

<ChrisBeer> Awesome news :)

daniel: opengov directive (un)conferences taking place in DC, next one on Feb 17
... last time had folks from OMB and other agencies that need to implement the OGD by April

<sandro> - US Gov't Budget announced ($81bn for IT?)

sandro: heard from kevin, need to find more detail about allocation

<sandro> cory: that'll be hard

<sandro> - Gov 2.0 Expo (proposal(s) accepted)

cory: very hard, but there may be a way, I guess

karen: IG submitted two proposals: panel on tradeoff and various types of techs (still under consideration)
... second for workshop on how to put open data on the Web (accepted)
... sandro and john to co-chair
... another proposal from W3C on Accesibility (accepted, too) will see Judy Brewer
... talking about that and its relation with mobile, etc.
... we're very happy, very good visibility for us

<ChrisBeer> +1 Jose

karen: also submitted to O'Reilly, no news yet

<Cory> yes

sandro: quick poll: who expects to attend?

<sandro> poll: attending gov 2 ?

<Daniel_Bennett> +.5

-1

<sandro> +1

<george> +1 - $$? tho

<bandholtz> -1

<karen> +

<karen> 1

<sandro> brian: -1 (probably)

<sandro> - FOSE (proposal(s) accepted)

<sandro> poll: attending fose

<cgi-irc> Rachel +1

sandro: more proposals accepted, one for FOSE

<Cory> +.5

<sandro> sandro: don't know

-1

<bandholtz> -1

<karen> -1 (same time as W3C AC meeting)

<george> +.25

<edsu> -1 # will be in dc though

<ChrisBeer> -1 :(

sandro: anything else about FOSE proposal?

karen: panel, kevin to chair, more focused on LOD
... daniel also participating

<cgi-irc> FOSE panel is Kevin, John, Daniel & Rachel

karen: more announcements

<sandro> subtopic: W3C AC members: AC meeting March 21-23

karen: for W3C AC Reps, registration is open (21-23 march at MIT)
... WWW2010, April, Raleigh, LOD camp there
... Web Science trust probably will co-locate and discuss eGov topics

<karen> http://www2010.org/www/

karen: opportunity to co-locate a eGov IG F2F, too
... RDF workshop announced, Ivan Herman is eager to see papers on vertical application areas
... such as eGov, I want to encourage to submit

sandro: I wrote a blog post about the topic a couple months ago

<edsu> first REST conference is happening at www2010 too http://ws-rest.org/

sandro: any other announcements?

john: tomorrow I've been invited by Danish government to speak about data.gov.uk

<Daniel_Bennett> nice John. have fun

<karen> +1 John Sheridan in Copenhagen

john: I'll be in Copenhagen, Danish Minister to open

<Daniel_Bennett> +1

john: 24 Feb, meetup in London
... Setefano ?? project officer at EU looking at SW and use and adoption by Govs
... he's trying to organize a workshop in Sept

<edsu> karen: http://www.meetup.com/Web-Of-Data/calendar/12317420/

rachel: reminder to everyone in the US that agencies are supposed to put up a page to get feedback

<karen> Is there a link?

rachel: on OGD and how they can be more transparent to the public

<sandro> rachel: comment window opens Saturday and runs for 2 weeks

rachel: comment opens Saturday and runs for 2 weeks

sandro: pointers?

rachel: they'll be available from whitehouse.gov

<sandro> rachel: will be on whitehouse.gov/open and see webcontent.gov

rachel: we'll also have a page to help agencies do their /open ones from webcontent.gov

sandro: more?

<edsu> karen: not sure what you're looking for, but that url has the info about the event, and how to sign up

[none heard]

Project Groups

sandro: last week we reviewed feedback, bunch of people interested

<sandro> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2010Feb/0029

sandro: we asked people about potential times for telcons
... poll closed yesterday
... group 4 was quite constraint, not much problems for the rest
... we need to review results and see when to start scheduling calls

<george> does today count for 3 days notice to this fri?

sandro: I need to book conference bridge, etc.
... there's a 3-day advance notice for this

cory: group 2: I've a conflict for the same slot over the next couple weeks
... in any case, I'd like to propose to combine 1&2
... to bring the strategy and technical view together
... would fit quite well for telcons in the near future
... and I'd propose the group 1 slot for that

sandro: Thomas?

<sandro> ACTION: sandro reserve bridge Thursday10 for Group 1 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/02/03-egov-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-96 - Reserve bridge Thursday10 for Group 1 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2010-02-10].

thomas: I'm also available on Thus??

cory: so we could probably start on Feb 11

<ChrisBeer> With regards to 4 - core members seem happy with the timing

<edsu> ChrisBeer: you just on irc?

<sandro> subtopic: group 3

<ChrisBeer> Have had feedback from non-respondants directly who indicate that that timeslot is fine. I'd envision that after initial telecon, we'd move into a more collab online workspace...

<ChrisBeer> @ ed yes

<ChrisBeer> ... collab online workspace and meet only as required.

george: thanks for the survey, apparently Fri at 9am works for enough folks
... we might want to start this week
... are we able to use same tools?

sandro, yes, but I cannot guarantee to have it ready for this Fri

george: ok, thanks, I'll start a wiki page to organize stuff
... I'll be away in India for 3 weeks, starting 8 Feb

<Cory> Sandro: Is there a "page" for projects 1&2?

george: so first thing for this Fri would be to get a co-coordinator to get things moving on

<sandro> not yet Cory, but you can make one.

<george> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/Projects/GLD_Demo

sandro: anyone in the group can make project pages in the wiki

<sandro> subtopic: project 4

<sandro> subtopic: project 5

daniel: generally it's a great time but haven't checked with all the group if they can attend
... Chris and I to work closely together

<Cory> Also, Is there group mail lists?

<ChrisBeer> +1 Daniel

<ChrisBeer> +1 Cory

daniel: good question from Cory on on subgroup lists

<sandro> subtopic: project 6

brian: very good time for me, haven't checked closely with people yet

<ChrisBeer> With regard to My and Daniels projects - given thier nature, much of the work can take place via correspondance imo, so we can be fairly flexible on when and what time we have those meetings.

brian: expect to develop best practices for social media in gov
... I'd like to hold first meeting next week
... Feb 12 at 3pm ET

sandro: mailing lists, we discussed about using tags at the beginning of the subject
... or making lists for subgroups
... I don't have a strong opinion, probably separate mailing lists is more flexible

<ChrisBeer> would like to see discussion forum format or the wiki actively used. Using tags on main list is a good idea - encourages participation from others on an ad-hoc basis

<george> +1 Chris

daniel: we can discuss among ourselves in the groups, use wiki discussion pages, ??

<george> folks can 'watch' wiki pages

<ChrisBeer> +1

sandro: I'm not sure

[some discussion about the various possibilities offered by the wiki]

<edsu> you might be able to filter based on page category, if groups assign their pages to a category

<george> +1 cory - create an entry page, make links on that to new pages, watch the entry page

<ChrisBeer> Case in point - it works for 100,000's people editing collaboratively on wikipedia, I'm sure we can make ours work for our little efforts :)

sandro: anybody feels strongly about separate mailing lists?

cory: let's start with subject tags and figure out if they're needed

<george> +1 cory - [3] = GLD_Demo

<ChrisBeer> I do in that I don't like the idea - encourages non-transparency

Brian: I second that
... if things get too "spammy" we might want to start separate ones

<edsu> +1 for 1 mailing list

<sandro> consensus: one list for now.

sandro: I think I hear consensus on starting with tags
... for the tags... I guess that people from each group should come up with their own
... anything else on the groups that we need right now?

<luigi> why not using a forum instead of a mailing list ?

sandro: I'll go ahead and make telcon reservations asap

<ChrisBeer> If we limit messages to the list to general discussion and RFCs on issues, we should be ok re "spammy". I'd encourage TF1-6 with the caveats someone suggested (FYI etc)

<Daniel_Bennett> group 5 can use the URL of their main page as the tag for their email, etc

<george> @sandro - thanks! will follow up :)

sandro: luigi, that's not what we have been using so far and haven't heard any push for that

<george> discussion on wiki page = subject forum

data.gov.uk

<ChrisBeer> +1 luigi, but unfortunately infrastructure would lie outside of w3c namespace :(

<luigi> ok, :(

<Cory> There is a (US) data.gov meeting next thursday - is anyone going?

<ChrisBeer> (ie: would require w3c to set up, test, tie into permissions structure etc)

john: we had a preview launch back in Nov 2009
... to get feedback from the developer community
... site was focused on being attractive to developers

<sandro> john: data.gov.uk is for developers, not for end-users.

john: departments are able to make more end-user friendly but not the main focus

<Cory> Interesting, we have no developer site for the US

john: most datasets were published by departaments themselves
... office of statistical information put info about transport, crime statistics
... there was a lot of policy activity focused on what should be done
... goal 1 is transparency but also very important enabling economic benefits

<ChrisBeer> We have one in Australi (developer site) - general feedback is good

john: of people building services and products on top
... published a paper on smarter government on this with some focus on public information
... UK gov followed W3C recommendations, in particular SW + LD
... discussion on which info should be made free, which one should have some sort of tax
... best example is Ordnance Survey, which is used to charge for its data

<edsu> Smarter Government

john: this needed consideration on the policy level, too

<ChrisBeer> Q: Is all data released under creative commons, or does Crown retain copyright?

john: and a big policy change to make it free
... because it costs to make information public
... another interesting discussion was around CC
... if it was compatible or not with licenses in the UK
... differences between 2.5 and 3.0 versions
... an issue in EU is the concept of ?? right, non-existant in the US
... on the technology side, having the departments producing the metadata themselves
... was a great idea, we did not intend to build a big central database
... how we can persist information of Web documents it's also of paramount importance for us
... we do archive Web content, it's the responsibility of the agencies to do it properly
... so if page not available, people will still be able to access it in the archive
... same consideration for datasets
... our approach to preservation is a very important piece of our work
... we use some RDFa, we will use more
... for example we mark CC licensed content
... we're adding it to descriptions of applications people are producing
... few things we learned by suing LD over last couple months:
... 1. needs of data producers much different from those of data consumers
... puts obligation into producers at departments to do the right thing
... on consumer side: many developers are much more comfortable using simpler APIs
... it's been a paradox, we're doing a piece of work on how we can "constraint" ourselves
... to build API features automatically onto data, so those can use it in an easier way for them

<luigi> maybe URI persistence must be distinguidshed from documents persistence

john: significant work being put on this
... for example, publishing JSON vs SPARQL endpoint
... first implementation should be available in few weeks

<sandro> (very cool -- automatic JSON and XML APIs from Linked Data)

john: in terms of some of the problems, we faced a few
... for example, if you have a URI for a school and data from a school
... those may be changed at different places and at a different point in time
... so if I want to get data about the school today, might be not the same I had a few months ago
... but the old one might not be available anywhere
... we're trying a few models and patterns to cope with this

<sandro> (yeah, that's a challenge .... looking at how the data was at time T.... (slightly different from how the world was at time T))

john: another big issue is provenance, what processes it has gone through
... who produced this data in the first place
... we are focusing hard on location information, trying to align LD work
... with implementation of the EU INSPIRE directive
... every object in EU should have a unique identifier (a boundary, for example)
... we need to reconcile how this is done with a LD approach
... second area: statistic, XTNS?? standard heavily used
... we hosted a 2-day workshop to learn how to reconcile both approaches

<Cory> Paper on change and provenance that may be useful: http://www.modeldriven.org/projects/EKB/Management%20of%20Change%20and%20Provenance%20in%20a%20RDF%20Repository.pdf

john: significant work also went on culture, significant concern from producers

<sandro> (yes - big fear - that this technology allows people to quickly and easily misunderstand the data :-)

john: big concern about loosing context and how people could interpret the data
... although we have a clear mandate, we talked and talked with people
... gave them tons of examples, TimBL invested significant time on this
... huge amount of activity on: policy, technology and cultural change

<Rachel> correction to comments about about /opengov comment period - it is open for six weeks (not 2)

john: tech going very fast, fantastic people working on it

<george> BIG THANKS TO JS!!! GREAT STUFF!!!!!

sandro: thanks, john, couple question
... how many people working on this?

john: core team of 10-15 people, but it spans out, we are kickstarting in several parts of gov
... statistics workshop alone had 37 people in attendance
... 30-40 officials from various departments also quickly involved when we needed to solve policy issues

sandro: how much of the published data is linked data?

john: not much, but getting there
... we did a piece of work on building URIs for UK public sector
... not LD per se but putting the pillars
... we have been identifying these pillars over the last couple months

<sandro> (good question: when iso establishes IDs for something, who should make a URI for them?)

george: I very much appreciate the work you guys are doing across technical and cultural boundaries
... what's the role played by CKAN and Talis??

john: in order to have single point of access, we wanted to build OSS tools
... we use Drupal and CKAN
... CKAN is a packaging system for code and data
... it provides a metadata registry service
... Talis provides hosting for LD
... but we want to publish on a distributed way
... they should be able to use other methods in the future, maybe Talis, maybe their own
... from a government procurement perspective this is good, you need better competition
... more to choose from, creates a marketplace
... Talis been fantastic in terms of support and expertise, lot of capability, very helpful

ed: second what George said, very important work
... do you think of LD as also encompassing the use of RDFa in pages (not datasets)?

john: absolutely

<edsu> josema: no worries i stumbled through that question :-)

<Daniel_Bennett> +1 John -- exciting work John

<Daniel_Bennett> good luck in Copenhagen.

john: example: if one owns the URI for the county of Norfolk

<sandro> (great stuff, having a separate same-as service to say "we *think* the wikipedia County of Norfolk is the same as our *official* County of Norfolk.")

john: one (gov) is reluctant to say that URI is the same as the one from the wikipedia

<Cory> Technical point: sameAs as an overly strong assertion - need Equivelent class

john: referring to that country because *one* is the official authoritative resource
... we are learning heaps and heaps
... you need to try this stuff out and experiment

<Cory> Cont... Need equivelent for "instances"

john: also massive is that we are not making happy many of the pragmatic people in search of data

<sandro> (yes, just providing linked data is not enough for developers -- some need JSON)

john: hence our API/JSON/XML approach
... potentially a huge win for LD standards

karen: thanks, john, helps me get more context, too

<george> isn't JSON serialization a part of 'RDF Futures'?

karen: US and UK initiatives, josema in Spain, you going to Denmark
... big question: how we can/shoud connect this IG, internationally effort better with those?

<karen> +1 JohnSheridan "World Tour" :)

karen: probably better for next time

<george> thanks all

sandro: time is over
... we're adjourned
... next meeting on Feb 17

[ADJOURNED]

- DRAFT -

SV_MEETING_TITLE

03 Feb 2010

Attendees

Contents

administration

Action Item Review

General Announcements, News

Project Groups

data.gov.uk

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output