W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > October 2008

[minutes] F2F, Day Two, 24 Oct 2008

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:39:44 +0100
Message-Id: <E00BC0F5-FE6B-4950-9C40-10846883AC60@w3.org>
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 October 2008 15:40:51 GMT