Government Linked Data Working Group Teleconference -- 26 Apr 2012

<sandro> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Date: 26 April 2012

<gatemezi> Scribe: Ghislain

<gatemezi> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20120426

Minutes http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/meeting/2012-04-19

<martinAlvarez> +1

<boris> +º

<boris> +1

<BenediktKaempgen> +1 minutes

<gatemezi> +1

<gatemezi> Approved last minutes

10-May-2012 telecon is cancelled

06-June-2012 telecon is cancelled

<gatemezi> bhyland: Someone wants to add something in today agenda?

Procurement

<gatemezi> bhyland: In USA, it is a big deal with procurement, specially with researchers ...

<gatemezi> Joe: In NASA they do basic operation, they do have contract, but don't have flexibility

<gatemezi> bhyland: Who's the target audience of our ComDir? Need broader discussion on the target audience...

<gatemezi> HadleyBeeman: gives some highlighgts in the UK context....

<HadleyBeeman> Having that "w3c thing to point to" would certainly help expand the market of contractors who can help with linked data.

<olyerickson> +1 to "standard deck" idea...

<olyerickson> ** there are 100's (now) slideshows on "Linked Data" but very few that will be useful for the target audience we're speaking of

<gatemezi> bhyland: Vocabs, BP, etc...begin to have interests.. It could be great to have a book for developers (LD)

<olyerickson> "Gov't Linked Data for Dummies" (or Managers...same thing)

<olyerickson> LOL

<olyerickson> I'm qualifie

Biplav: In Western countries "Open Gov't Data is seen as a way of energizing the economy…" Another benefit that other other parts of the world are looking at are accountability and dealing with corruption.

… Thinking about securing economic growth is a very important concept for countries like India and China, Biplav imagines.

… Hurdle is not about technology, rather, about policy. There aren't many resources / guidance for what to open up...

<gatemezi> Biplav: we could deal also the policy issue..e.g: India

<gatemezi> Biplav: The national policy should be the first in place...but it is not yet present...

… Policy should be the first thing, then technology and best practices would definitely help. It turns out that procurement is one of the most common and not surprisingly, most prone to corruption.

<HadleyBeeman> +1 to providing examples with their own data

… Corruption is very well documented, all the way to the UN level. Streamlined procurement and addressing corruption.

eGov IG is a good place to speak about policy … Jeanne Holm and Tomaz the new co-chair … good place to participate.

<gatemezi> eGov IG URL: http://www.w3.org/egov/wiki/Main_Page

W3C sites (using WP) launched in 2011 has:

1) http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/

2) http://www.w3.org/standards/semanticweb/data

W3C catalyst in the catalyst of communities

3) W3C Community and Business Groups, see http://www.w3.org/community/

http://www.w3.org/community/about/

W3C sites launched:

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Rhizomer

Sandro: Overall structure of W3C includes Working Groups (heavy commitment) .. on the other end of the spectrum, are lighter commitment groups, "Community Group"

<gatemezi> sandro: gives the difference between "Incubator gorups", "community group" and "working group"

Sandro: There are about 80 Community Groups. It has replaced the incubator group that lead to the Provenance Group, for example. The Community Groups do not have W3C professional staff associated with them.

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/community/about/#bg

Sandro: W3C Business Groups are heavier weight, there is a cost associated with them. There is professional support associated with them.

They don't produce standards.

Patent policy is different.

<gatemezi> sandro: "Business Group" is cheaper than W3C...They don't make standards..

Some businesses won't join a group unless the patent policy is "just right".

<sandro> http://www.w3.org/community/groups/

PhilA: The reason for the business group is to provide social engineering with a vertical focus.

They don't have a strong link with W3C .. a way for W3C to become more visible and relevant.

ComDir

Adding companies, products to the W3C Semantic Media Wiki site: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/

Sandro: Has a lot of data but some people consider it a restrictive to enter.

Under http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Main_Page

<BenediktKaempgen> Maybe: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Special:Categories

<gatemezi> bhyland: how do we make the ComDir better? We can use the sw wiki and connect to our work

There is a listing of tools on the W3C semantic web wiki page: see http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Category:Tool

New Startup Member W3C category.

<HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/fees-201202

Community Directory (return to)

Goal is to make the Community Directory more usable.

and friendly, usable to more stakeholders.

<PhilA2> Fees for Dutch companies. I was wrong, Sandro was right, it's �2K for start ups http://www.w3.org/Consortium/fees?country=Netherlands&quarter=04-01&year=2012#results

Olyerickson: There are things that may or may not be done with the bit 3 search engines.

<sandro> BartvanLeeuwen, see http://www.w3.org/Consortium/fees-201202#startup and http://www.w3.org/Consortium/fees?country=Netherlands&quarter=04-01&year=2012#results It's EUR 1950.

Olyerickson: What can we do to surface the data using RDFa, microformats, schema.org

<BartvanLeeuwen> +1

olyerickson: We need to make the CD found by everyone interested in best practices, vocabs and anything else we produce to serve this community.

<sandro> +10000

<sandro> +1 sw/wiki is not a very use friendly site

<gatemezi> BenediktKaempgen: sw tool is not a useful and friendly tool

<Zakim> sandro, you wanted to say usability is king

<HadleyBeeman> +1 to Sandro: usability is more important than semantic analysis (where we have to choose)

<gatemezi> Sandro: The key thing with ComDir is usability...not really the technology behind

Sandro: I don't think any sem web technologies are relevant per se, rather the content & usability is key. Focus must be on usability.

The most usable site is one that has data that can be exported.

<HadleyBeeman> +1 to Sandro: usability is more important than semantic analysis (where we have to choose) — for this situation (the community directory)

<gatemezi> olyerickson: ComDir could be also focused on the users...

<gatemezi> +1 to Sandro point...

<sandro> sandro: ... but we do need to make sure the data is always available for export, so people can make other interfaces to it.

<BenediktKaempgen> +1 for focusing on the content and nost on the usabilit mostly

<gatemezi> bhyland: It has been a useful discussion... Need volunteers for ComDir

Announcement

Open Gov't Transparency Conference in DC run by Sunlight Foundation

<BartvanLeeuwen> thx bye

<BenediktKaempgen> Thanks!

- DRAFT -

Government Linked Data Working Group Teleconference

26 Apr 2012

Attendees

Contents