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

Re: Multi-channel delivery: eGov publishing channels

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 12:58:14 +0200
Cc: Joe Carmel <joe.carmel@comcast.net>, eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, Adam Schwartz <aschwartz@gpo.gov>, Miguel Ángel Amutio <miguel.amutio@map.es>, "Ken Fischer ClickForHelp.com" <ken@clickforhelp.com>
Message-Id: <52F35DD3-E34A-43BF-81A1-0AAA9BA9053E@w3.org>
To: "Owen Ambur" <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
As I mentioned at the last Group call, I was trying to recruit a  
person to lead this section. I'm happy to say that Miguel A. Amutio,  
Ministry for Public Administration (Spain), copied, has agreed to give  
it a try and is in the process of joining the Group.

Thanks again so much, Miguel.

I'm also copy Ken who was actioned [1] to write a paragraph or two on  
what the content of this section should look like.

I believe that the discussion below refers more to what is called in  
EU "re-use of public sector information" than to what is called "multi- 
channel delivery" which also includes e.g. brick and mortar offices or  
SMS. No doubt there's an intersection there anyway.

-- Jose

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/51


El 06/04/2009, a las 17:08, Owen Ambur escribió:
> Joe, while I personally am more interested in pull (query)  
> capabilities than in push (browse) capabilities, regardless of the  
> means of delivery, I have long argued that .gov folks should specify  
> XML schemas for and make all of their public records readily  
> available to the public.
>
> With respect to the information “feed” capabilities you are  
> suggesting, I’d be surprised if GPO, the Federal Web Council, and  
> the USA.gov folks are not considering how best they might be able to  
> provide such services for U.S. federal agencies.  I have also argued  
> that the IT Infrastructure Optimization LoB should focus on .gov  
> data/records (as opposed to hardware and software):  http://xml.gov/stratml/IOILOB.xml
>
> However, thus far, only one of the plans in the StratML collection  
> explicitly references “twitter”.   Two reference Facebook.  Eighteen  
> reference “XML” and 34 reference “news,” while 160 contain the term  
> “data” and 82 cite “records”.  http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#SearchServices
>
> 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 Joe Carmel
> Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 8:27 AM
> To: 'eGov IG'
> Subject: Multi-channel delivery: eGov publishing channels
>
> On the call yesterday, we were breaking multi-channel delivery into  
> the two ideas (1) devices (e.g., mobile devices as a secondary  
> channel) and (2) multi-channel redistribution from a PSA and/or  
> social network re-publishing perspective.  When we were discussing  
> the idea, I was thinking about something like http:// 
> twitterfeed.com/ where the government would post “good” data and  
> then use a government-sponsored service to push their data to  
> various approved channels automatically.
>
> Using an automated redistribution tool like twitterfeed makes sense  
> to me as a best practice but I assume the government would want it  
> to be more capable and probably more within their control.  Maybe  
> this idea has been raised before (although I haven’t seen it), but  
> it seems like there’s a real opportunity for an international body  
> or individual governments to consider building a tool that would  
> provide redistribution for all of their departments and agencies.   
> The objective being a single government web application that  
> automates redistribution of syndicated government information to  
> social networks and other communities: twitterfeed for eGov.   This  
> sounds like something Owen has previously suggested, but I can’t  
> remember.
>
> http://twitter.com/HouseFloor seems like it might be an example of  
> the back-end of this sort of process.  Based on looking at this  
> page, it seems to me that twitter is screenscraping http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/floor.html 
>  to createhttp://twitter.com/statuses/user_timeline/7402662.rss  
> which in turn feeds twitter.
>
> By providing this sort of web application, government can encourage  
> the use of open government data standards since the input files from  
> each agency would need to use a standard approach.  This reminds me  
> of the original ideas behind SGML to “write once and publish  
> many” (e.g., Braille, print, electronic).  Most likely, the decision  
> to publish to a social network as a channel is itself probably a  
> hurdle for some agencies.  Having a government-approved web site  
> that assists government organizations in the eGovernment  
> redistribution process would reduce the need by each agency to  
> determine which channels are appropriate/approved and it would  
> eliminate the technical effort by individual agencies to transform  
> their data format to the format required by the social network  
> website.
>
> It seems like if something like this took hold it could also be a  
> seed for a couple of other good outcomes:  (1) broader use of  
> standards by the govt. for communication to the public and (2)  
> government-wide capability to provide automated dissemination of  
> various datasets (not just 140 character stuff) which would lead to  
> improved interoperability of government data (at least for the  
> formats chosen).
>
> Joe
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2009 10:59:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 7 April 2009 10:59:10 GMT