W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > April 2009

Re: applications and vocabularies enabling public debates

From: Ed Pastore <epastore@metagovernment.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 19:02:52 -0400
Cc: "'Luigi Selmi'" <selmi_luigi@hotmail.com>, <box1_price@debategraph.org>, <vassilios.peristeras@deri.org>, "'eGovIG'" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, <david@debategraph.org>, <john.breslin@nuigalway.ie>, <siegfried.handschuh@deri.org>, "Adam Schwartz" <aschwartz@gpo.gov>
Message-Id: <F0060F6A-62EF-4AED-9FDF-B5A11F333E41@metagovernment.org>
To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>, Metagovernment Startup Committee <start@metagovernment.org>
Thank you for including me in this discussion, Owen. I am cc'ing the  
Metagovernment list server, as others there are likely to have a  
better and deeper understanding of what is being talked about here  
than I can.

In reference to your earlier comment, Metagovernment is not focused on  
software as much as on our basic principles:
and on the concept that the internet opens up greatly superior  
alternatives to representative democracy (specifically, we wish to  
build - by whatever means - an eventual replacement for representative  
democracy, not just in political government but in any governance  
setting). Everyone receiving this message is quite welcome to join our  
open group:

I agree that we will need a good data structure for communities to be  
able to share their findings... and perhaps their members. This  
becomes especially important in cascading communities, i.e. where  
there is a hierarchy of progressively scaling communities.

I would also like to point out another project which is somewhat  
similar to Metagovernment but has a more formalized structure:
which you can see instantiated here:

P.S. While the Metagovernment list is open for anyone to join, only  
subscribers can post to it. If you do not wish to join, please feel  
free to still include the list address as a recipient to your reply  
and I will approve your non-member post. However, you are very much  
encouraged to just join our very interesting global group.

Ed Pastore

On Apr 1, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Owen Ambur wrote:

> I inferred a strategic plan from the information provided athttp://debategraph.org/ 
>  and rendered it in Strategy Markup Language (StratML) format for  
> inclusion in our collection at http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#Otheror 
> , more specifically, http://xml.gov/stratml/DGO.xml
> It is the 472nd plan indexed in Mark Logic’s StratML search service  
> prototype --http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#SearchServices -- in  
> which it currently ranks 1st among 33 referencing the term “debate”.
> The prospective purposes of the emerging StratML standard are  
> outlined athttp://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#DefinitionPurposes   
> Under the auspices of AIIM, we aim to establish it as an  
> international voluntary consensus standard for potential use by all  
> organizations worldwide.
> It will be interesting to see whether Debategraph can be  
> productively used to enable stakeholders to provide feedback on the  
> strategic goals and objectives of organizations whose missions and  
> values are of interest to them.
> Owen Ambur
> Co-Chair Emeritus, xmlCoP
> Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee
> Member, AIIM iECM Committee
> Invited Expert, W3C eGov IG
> Communications/Membership Director, FIRM Board
> Former Project Manager, ET.gov
> Brief Bio
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Luigi Selmi
> Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:36 AM
> To: box1_price@debategraph.org; vassilios.peristeras@deri.org
> Cc: eGovIG; david@debategraph.org; john.breslin@nuigalway.ie; siegfried.handschuh@deri.org
> Subject: RE: applications and vocabularies enabling public debates
> Hi David and All,
> It would be very interesting having a look of the public ontology  
> that you use or could implement based on your data model. I didn't  
> find any document about that ontology on the Debategraph site. Are  
> you going to implement it ? And in which language RDFS, OWL ? Do you  
> have any plan to set up a SPARQL endpoint other than the API in  
> order to make queries over the maps?
> Luigi
> "A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step." Lao Tzu
> _______________________________
> Luigi Selmi, MSc
> addr.: 12 P.zza Roselle 00179 Rome, Italy
> skype: luigiselmi
> mobile: 3482405674
> web site: http://www.sharesemantics.com
> blog: http://www.sharesemantics.com/people/weblog
> cv: http://www.linkedin.com/in/luigiselmi
> CC: selmi_luigi@hotmail.com; public-egov-ig@w3.org; david@debategraph.org 
> ;john.breslin@nuigalway.ie; siegfried.handschuh@deri.org
> From: box1_price@debategraph.org
> To: vassilios.peristeras@deri.org
> Subject: Re: applications and vocabularies enabling public debates
> Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 14:15:03 +0100
> Thanks, Vassilios and Luigi.
> A couple of quick updates:
> (1) We are working on an API to open up the public maps - and I  
> would welcome feedback from the group on any specific  
> characteristics / features you would like to see with / from the API.
> (2) It is straightforward for us to implement different ontologies  
> in Debategraph (in addition to the public one we have three more  
> operating behind the scenes - as part of our internal architecture).  
> So if anyone is interested in experimenting with this, let me know.  
> We plan to add a UI soon to allow you to define and implement your  
> own ontologies directly via the web.
> Finally, if anyone is D.C. based and would like to meet, I'll be in  
> Washington towards the end of this month.
> David
> David Price
> Co-founder
> Debategraph
> Tel: +44 (0) 20 8144 2860
> Web: debategraph.org
> Blog: opentopersuasion.com
> Twitter: twitter.com/debategraph
> [deleted]
Received on Monday, 6 April 2009 09:23:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:40 UTC