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

Re: Open Government data

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 18:36:51 +0200
Cc: "Dave McAllister" <dmcallis@adobe.com>, <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <349DF25C-505E-4949-896C-B826054982EE@w3.org>
To: "Todd Vincent" <todd.vincent@xmllegal.org>
ISSUE-27

Todd,

Are you fine with Dave's suggested replacement text for that bit or  
would you like to elaborate a bit more on the topic?

Thanks,
Jose.


El 23/04/2009, a las 0:26, Todd Vincent escribió:

> I agree with Dave, but possibly for different reasons.  In  
> government, one can broadly classify information exchange formats as:
>
> 1. Messages (aka protocols, web services, data exchanges, etc.)
> 2. Forms
> 3. Documents
>
> PDF fits easily into categories 2 and 3, not 1, so the negative  
> statement regarding PDF in the context of "Messages" is misplaced.   
> It is comparing apples and oranges.
>
> Whether or not PDF is the right government "standard" for 2 and 3 is  
> a different question.
>
> Finally, if you can avoid making a negative statement, it is  
> probably better.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Todd
> ===========================
> Winchel "Todd" Vincent III
> <xmlLegal> http://www.xmllegal.org/
> Phone : 404.822.4668
> Fax     : 770.216.1633
> Email : Todd.Vincent@xmllegal.org
>
> This message including any attachments and links to outside  
> resources contains confidential information intended for a specific  
> individual and purpose and is protected by law.  If you are not the  
> intended recipient, please delete this message.  Disclosing,  
> copying, or distributing this message, or the taking of any action  
> based on it, is prohibited without permission.
>
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Dave McAllister
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 5:36 PM
> To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Open Government data
>
> In light of the discussion on standards  and with respect to the  
> Semantic Web
>
> The current draft still includes the negative reference as follows:
>
>
> “Governments would need to publish the required interfaces so third  
> parties could query their information in distributed Web  
> applications. This could provide huge benefits:
>
> Publishing a PDF document on a portal provides almost no means for  
> automation - where Semantic Web would indeed provide a high degree  
> of automation.
> While current technologies (Web Services, REST, etc.) provide such  
> automation, public administrations need to create some set of  
> queries and offer them as an API. This provides value, but requires  
> design - and the decision on which queries are supported (and which  
> not). It is impossible to foresee all the scenarios of data usage,  
> so usage is therefore limited.”
>
> I am concerned that the representation of PDF here is unfair. While  
> not an expert in the Semantic Web, the experts within Adobe assure  
> me such statement is misleading and does not reflect the current  
> capabilities of PDF.
>
> Can we remove such reference, perhaps replacing it with
>
> Publishing a static document on a portal provides a uniquely  
> challenging effort for automation – where Semantic Web constructs  
> would indeed provide a high degree of automation easily.
>
> davemc
> -- 
> Dave McAllister
> Director, Standards and Open Source
> 650-523-4942 (GC)
> 408-536-3881 (Office)
> Dwmcallister (Skype, Aim, YIM)
> http://blogs.adobe.com/open
Received on Friday, 24 April 2009 16:50:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 24 April 2009 16:50:48 GMT