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

Re: Plain Language use case [was RE: Suggestion for Introduction]

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:00:52 +0200
Cc: "'pavan kumar'" <yangaldaspk@yahoo.com>, <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, "Laurens van den Oever" <laurens@xopus.com>
Message-Id: <F071310E-4E0A-4A2C-A24E-7381E5874A79@w3.org>
To: "Owen Ambur" <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
> ...
> Iím copying Laurens in the event that Xopus may wish to provide  
> similar capability to collaboratively edit W3C Notes, like ours: http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/Group/docs/note

Hm, I would like to try that.

> ...
> When I suggested that W3C Notes are somewhat ďproprietaryĒ in  
> nature, I was referring to the fact that editors are expected, if  
> not required to use Amaya -- http://www.w3.org/Amaya/ -- and in my  
> case, the W3Cís technical support folks were unable to give me edit  
> access to the draft.  In my view, that violates the principle of  
> separation of concern by tying the data too closely to the software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_concerns 
>    From my perspective, a good test of the openness of ďdataĒ is  
> whether it can be edited using myriad tools.  It also seems to me  
> that the W3Cís publication rules are a little onerous and focus on  
> issues other than making the W3Cís data readily accessible to and  
> usable by stakeholders (like us).  Perhaps that is merely a case of  
> ignorance on my part.  However, highly effective organizations have  
> ways of accommodating ignorant as well as highly educated  
> stakeholders.

Owen, Amaya is not required to edit the note. The Note is XHTML, you  
can use any editor you like to edit it. The issue we have here is that  
of editing it _online_.

W3C has a CVS-backed system and in order to edit the Note in place,  
there are only two options: CVS or HTTP PUT. Since getting a CVS  
account takes usually much longer I asked for Jigedit (HTTP PUT)  
accounts for authors. Amaya is one of the very few tools that  
implement HTTP PUT. I wish there were more. I'm sorry you had issues  
with it.

As you know, the draft lived in the wiki for quite some time. I moved  
it to the current place as the publishing date was getting closer and  
to work on the pubrules compliance. Look at the number of references  
and the code behind them, that alone took me quite some time.

If I were a better Mediawiki user and would have had more time by  
then, we all could probably have edited it at its wiki location. Move  
portions and edit them there if you want and I'll take care of copying  
them to the doc once changes agreed. You can also edit offline and  
send the text or a diff by email.

Again, I'm sorry about the trouble. I wish we had more and better  
tools but resources are very limited. I'm open to suggestions and  

-- Jose

> 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 pavan kumar
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 1:38 AM
> To: RachelFlagg
> Cc: 'Sharron Rush'; 'public-egov-ig@w3.org'
> Subject: Re: Plain Language use case [was RE: Suggestion for  
> Introduction]
> "(Owen A. or anyone, would love your help, if you can put the doc  
> into xml...I frankly don't have time right now, so just posted a  
> word doc.)"
> to the group leaders
> may i suggest the website 'xopus.com' that does free conversion of  
> plain text to XML, well i could be wrong, but i guess the website  
> can do this, saves time.
> pavan kumar
> ps: most of the times i am so lost on the egov work being done by  
> this pioneering group. this is a kind of invaluable learning  
> experience for me... kindly let me know, if for any basic work, i  
> can lend my time.
> --- On Mon, 20/4/09, Flagg, Rachel <rachel.flagg@hud.gov> wrote:
> From: Flagg, Rachel <rachel.flagg@hud.gov>
> Subject: Plain Language use case [was RE: Suggestion for Introduction]
> To: "'Sharron Rush'" <srush@knowbility.org>, "'public-egov- 
> ig@w3.org'" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Date: Monday, 20 April, 2009, 9:53 PM
> Sharron,
> Thanks for the reminder.  I've had the plain language draft use case  
> done for several weeks... but have finally posted the draft to the  
> wiki - comments welcome.  (Owen A. or anyone, would love your help,  
> if you can put the doc into xml...I frankly don't have time right  
> now, so just posted a word doc.)
> Also agree, Sharron, with your suggestion to start the Note off with  
> a brief, plain language intro.  The average person usually has a  
> hard time understanding "geek speak", so the more clear and simple  
> we can explain what we're trying to do, the better.  eGov is all  
> about "the people", so I think this needs to be written in language  
> the general public can understand.
> Thanks!
> -Rachel
> Rachel Flagg
> Web Content Manager
>    and Co-Chair, Federal Web Managers Council
> Government Web Best Practices Team (on detail)
> Office of Citizen Services
> U.S. General Services Administration
> rachel.flagg@hud.gov
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Sharron Rush
> Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 9:58 AM
> To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Suggestion for Introduction
> Hello editors,
> In going through the wiki, I find a Pending Use Case around Plain
> Language.  That was the point I tried to make in my first message - I
> think we need to model that.  Rachel, can I support you in that work  
> in
> any way?
> But as a start, here is a suggestion for the Introduction.  I am a
> strong advocate for introductory text that simply lays the foundation
> and lets readers know what to expect.  I believe that we may want to
> include one short paragraph (an example is suggested below, but please
> feel free to reject or rewrite) and move all the other explanatory  
> text
> into the Background section.
> _Introduction:_
> The mission of the e-Government Interest group is to provide a forum  
> and
> leadership around the issue of how to improve access to government
> through better use of the Web and to achieve better government
> transparency using open Web standards.  We have pursued the mission in
> year 1 by setting these goals for the group:
> 1.      Explore the benefits and challenges for both citizens and  
> their
> governments of establishing effective, transparent and inclusive two- 
> way
> electronic communication and participatory systems of governing.
> 2.      Define the critical links that are needed between standards
> bodies and government entities to help citizens and governments meet  
> the
> challenges and realize the benefits.
> 3.      Develop a flexible list of concerns and deliverables to help
> build cooperative relationships that lead to productive next steps.
> To meet these goals, the group worked within three Task Forces:  
> Usage of
> Web Standards, Transparency and Participation, and Seamless  
> Integration
> of Data.  The following document describes our findings.
> ...so, what do you think?  If there is another avenue that you would
> rather I use for suggestions of this kind, please let me know.  And
> thanks for considering!
> Best,
> Sharron
> Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.
Received on Tuesday, 21 April 2009 15:09:51 UTC

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