W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-credibility@w3.org > February 2019

Foundations for Evidence-Based Policy Act -- Opportunities for the W3C & CredWeb CG

From: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 22:05:02 -0500
To: <public-credibility@w3.org>
Cc: "Chet Ensign" <chet.ensign@oasis-open.org>, "Betsy Fanning" <betsy.fanning@3dpdfconsortium.org>, "Steve Levenson" <uslevenson@verizon.net>, "Robert Blatt [E.I.D.]" <Robert.Blatt@eid-inc.com>, <liz.icenogle@gmail.com>, "'Kim Bartkus'" <kim.hropen@gmail.com>, "Russell Ruggiero" <russell_ruggiero@hotmail.com>, "William Glascoe III" <eosocxo@comcast.net>, "'Jessica Lombardo'" <jlombardo@AIIM.ORG>
Message-ID: <02e801d4cf12$68702d10$39508730$@verizon.net>
Sandro, H.R. 4174, the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act (FEBPA), signed into law on January 14 by President Trump, offers a number of new opportunities for the W3C and the CredWeb CG.  

 

Most relevant, for example,  agencies are required to compile evidence-building plans:  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#evidence-building_plan  

 

I have rendered the requirements for such plans in StratML Part 2, Performance Plan/Report, format as a template for possible agency usage, at http://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#PP4EBP  In compiling their evidence-building plans, agencies are required to consult with stakeholders:  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#evidence-building_plan_stakeholder_consultation  The CredWeb CG could consider what content should be included in such plans to flesh out the performance plan template and proactively reach out to the agencies with offers of assistance in applying it.

 

Title II of the FEBPA, the OPEN Government Data Act (OGDA), also includes several pertinent requirements.  

 

For example, agencies are required to compile and maintain Strategic Information Management Resources Plans:  http://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#SIRMP  The W3C could help specify the important elements and content of such plans.

 

Additionally, agencies are required to compile data inventories and provide metadata for each data asset.  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#Data_Inventory & http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#inventory_metadata  

 

Agencies are directed to engage the public -- http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#public_engagement -- including with respect to helping them prioritize disclosures of their data assets.  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#priority_for_disclosure 

 

They are expressly directed to make their data assets machine-readable, including any records subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#machine-readabilty & http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#FOIA 

 

OMB is required to maintain an online repository of “tools, best practices, and schema standards <http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#schema_standards>  to facilitate the adoption of open data practices across the Federal Government …”  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#Repository  Such schema standards are to be maintained by standard development organizations, like the W3C and OASIS:  http://stratml.us/references/HR4174.htm#SDOs  It would be good if the SDOs could coordinate their efforts to help agencies apply the applicable standard schemas to their records.

 

I hope this information is helpful and that the W3C as well as OASIS, ARMA and other SDOs will capitalize effectively on the opportunities presented by this new and important law.

 

Owen Ambur

Chair,  <http://stratml.us/> StratML Working Group

Co-Chair Emeritus,  <http://xml.govwebs.net/> xml.gov CoP

Webmaster,  <http://firmcouncil.org/> FIRM

 <https://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur> Profile on LinkedIn | Personal  <http://ambur.net/> Home Page

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 1:21 PM
To: An Xiao Mina <an@meedan.com>; public-credibility@w3.org
Subject: Re: Thanks everyone

 

On 2/26/19 11:17 AM, An Xiao Mina wrote: 

I’m stepping down today as co-chair. It’s been quite a run with this  community group — I’ve learned a lot from everyone and have enjoyed our collaborations. It’s been great working with you all, and I look forward to seeing what the group produces moving forward!
 


An, thank you so much for all your work over the past 18+ months. I look forward to seeing what you do next!

All, things have been very quiet in this group for a few months. I've been working with a few groups/events in the field, like CredCon <https://www.credcon.org/> , the CUNY Signals of Quality in News <https://medium.com/@TKCUNY/aggregating-signals-of-quality-in-news-3fc1d009dc19>  project, and JTI <https://www.cen.eu/news/workshops/Pages/WS-2018-004.aspx> , and I'm pondering what makes sense for the CG in 2019.

I think the main things are:

1. maintaining an easy-to-use database of credibility signals, as used in various projects (building on Credibility Signals <https://credweb.org/signals> )
2. establish technical standards and best practices for sharing credibility signal data (probably starting from a baseline of JSON-LD inside HTML). We might have some organizations ready to start doing this.

Does this fit your sense of how the CG could be productive?  Are there other things it could be doing? Are there ways you'd like to help? Thoughts welcome via email this list or in private email.

      -- Sandro
Received on Thursday, 28 February 2019 03:05:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 28 February 2019 03:05:34 UTC