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

eGov IG Call -- 19 August 2009

From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:47:58 +0200
Message-Id: <6010F2B7-4F67-4A83-A86A-726CDDD9F104@w3.org>
To: eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Hi group,

Minutes are available online at:

  http://www.w3.org/2009/08/19-egov-minutes

and as text below.

There are some @@ and ??? where I missed some stuff. Please, provide  
the text if you can and any other comments by Friday first in the  
morning (CET).

Next meeting: September, 2nd, 13:00Z. Please, suggest agenda items in  
advance.

Cheers,
Jose.


----------

    [1]W3C

       [1] http://www.w3.org/

                                - DRAFT -

                eGovernment Interest Group Teleconference

19 Aug 2009

    [2]Agenda

       [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Aug/0003

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2009/08/19-egov-irc

Attendees

    Present
           AdamHarvey, Daniel_Bennett, Josema, Brand, Rachel, Sylvia,
           Owen, John, George, Oscar (part), Vagner

    Regrets
           Kevin

    Chair
           John

    Scribe
           Josema

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Agenda adjustments and next meetings
          2. [6]Data.gov.* memo
          3. [7]Charter and Plan
          4. [8]What's going on
      * [9]Summary of Action Items
      _________________________________________________________

Agenda adjustments and next meetings

    next meeting: 2 Sept, 1300Z

    next scribe: Daniel

    josema: any additions?

    daniel: plenary

Data.gov.* memo

    <Daniel_Bennett>
    [10]http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfxgcdfc_2494cw4hg8

      [10] http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfxgcdfc_2494cw4hg8

    daniel: difficult to edit the wiki, copied it to Google Docs (see
    pointer above)
    ... Adam + me made edits for language, additions
    ... sent to group recently as starting point for discussion
    ... we'll use tracker to track comments, etc.
    ... we have one week to discuss before sending out to ETF
    ... expecting to present it at Gov 2.0 Summit
    ... many high level eGov folks attending
    ... good opportunity

    <AdamHarvey> Lots of echo on the call

    daniel: expecting to make some PR noise
    ... I consider the editor's copy at google to be "outline-complete"
    ... but not "content-complete" yet

    <johnlsheridan> sorry I'm late everyone

    <josema> john, can you chair from now on? (I'm scribing)

    <johnlsheridan> sure

    <josema> thx

    <scribe> chair: john

    <Daniel_Bennett>
    [11]http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfxgcdfc_2494cw4hg8

      [11] http://docs.google.com/View?id=dfxgcdfc_2494cw4hg8

    [daniel reads aloud the first paragraph]

    [daniel goes through document]

    john: comments?

    owen: glad to know about target audience being Gov 2.0 Summit
    attendants
    ... graphics can take a lot of time to produce and review
    ... based on previous experience, so glad to know we have a short
    time deadline
    ... important to have high quality content

    george: I appreciate the effort
    ... for those that are trying this "data transparency" world we
    probably don't want
    ... to give the impression this is experimental ???
    ... need to work on solid ground ???
    ... how people expect readers will digest this ???
    ... in general looks really great

    daniel: adam and I talked about doing a potential use case
    ... e.g. a national service that could out up useful data up there
    ... and how people could consume it and visualize it
    ... e.g. graphs of temperatures over a year

    george: sounds great, good approach
    ... there's also some @@ going on
    ... I was trying to differentiate between APIs and a little more
    exploration on what Linked Data actually means
    ... what's a triple store kind of thing ???

    <AdamHarvey> I think George's points will be fleshed out by the
    small issues papers in the future

    daniel: [scribe missed]

    george: john, you are using stuff like Talis, right?

    john: yes, and also putting together an OSS stack for Linked Data
    ... we cannot use just one company's approach
    ... need to have something to give to agencies

    george: Talis use is a good example of where and how to put stuff
    easily
    ... as an example
    ... this is not so experimental, not rocket science either

    john: quite a few comments
    ... document is growing
    ... we're starting to include the howtos
    ... I think it should be a high level, short and crisp

    <AdamHarvey> +1 to john's point about this being high-level doc

    john: if we need more accuracy, we should put that in other docs
    ... mention technologies, for example
    ... "we're all learning" section for me means
    ... govs publishing data over the last 10 years
    ... but not using LOD
    ... message is tech is mature, gov knowlegde of it is not
    ... also this IG is the venue to discuss about this
    ... maybe we need a clearer statement about it
    ... mature but not operational in gov space yet
    ... show we as group are here to help move it forward
    ... in general, for me is a bit too techie and deep

    <AdamHarvey>
    [12]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Aug/0012.
    html

      [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-egov-ig/2009Aug/0012.html

    adam: agree with john
    ... maybe too deep
    ... [adam refers to message above]

    [@@scribe missed last comment@@]

    daniel: part of putting doc out is to have the info there and have
    the ETF working on it in the sense you mentioned

    <johnlsheridan> but this isn't a linked data "how to" right?

    <AdamHarvey> I said I feel that the tone of the document should be
    more inclusive to people who are hesitant about what it takes to
    start using OGD.

    daniel: "we're all learning" should probably say this is just a
    beginning doc and if you want to learn more
    ... and move forward, come join us, lot more to do together

    <johnlsheridan> +1

    daniel: first section could be changed to set the ground saying this
    are some easy steps you can try
    ... as a start

    <josema> I agree with simplifying and adam's and john's comments

    john: we should not produce a detailed howto with this one
    ... "this is only a beginning" and "here's our group" should be the
    summary

    daniel: should I take out all the technical info?

    john: not exactly, we need to achieve a balance
    ... we maybe just want to say: if you want to do X, go see this
    (document)
    ... but probably not deeper than that

    owen: we might be talking about a distinction between text and
    graphical version
    ... latter could just include high level summary, not technical
    details, deferred for former

    daniel: I thought that was the original idea
    ... adam has been doing a good job with graphics in that sense

    adam: owen's point is what I had in mind with the recipe graphic
    ... linking to other docs with technical details

    daniel: someone could just print the recipe and put it up
    ... and have it as a primer for the process and could find more
    details quickly

    john: do you think a simplified version of docs or the graphics are
    good to help data.gov.*
    ... people to make a decision?

    daniel: good question
    ... it should help people wanting to persuade others of the benefits
    ... techies would also find their way by following the pointers

    john: are we conveying the benefits well enough in the recipe?

    daniel: I think the addition of the use case could help
    ... thinking of having 3-4 slides like that, point to big wins ???

    john: when you talk to non-data people, one of the interesting
    things in LD for them
    ... (e.g. discussion with UK head of statistics)
    ... they publish schools data, someone asks for info on schools on a
    given area
    ... they need to make an application and aggregate by hand
    ... LD simplifies this a lot
    ... there are problems LD solves that are not very difficult but
    really need to be solved
    ... and this makes those people's lives easier

    daniel: @@

    john: this is exactly what we are doing

    <Owen> Here's an example of the point that John just made:
    [13]http://report.nih.gov/award/trends/state_congressional/stateover
    view.cfm

      [13] http://report.nih.gov/award/trends/state_congressional/stateoverview.cfm

    daniel: can we use it as example?

    john: little bit early
    ... but we could generalize

    daniel: let's talk offline

    john: next steps with memo?

    <Daniel_Bennett> fyi
    [14]http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/XQuery/UK_shipping_forecast

      [14] http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/XQuery/UK_shipping_forecast

    john: good conversation so far, reposition lessons learned, see what
    ETF comes out with
    ... how long will ETF need?

    rachel: the more time, the better

    daniel: reminder from beginning of call
    ... all proposed changes/comments should be sent to me/adam by next
    Wed
    ... we'll pull out geeky parts as much as possible from middle of
    doc
    ... circulate more graphics based on input
    ... circulate something else between Wed/Thu next week
    ... use tracker to track changes/comments
    ... then send to ETF

    <AdamHarvey> I can make textual changes to the graphics quite
    quickly if necessary.

    daniel: that would be the 27th, and we'll still have two weeks

    <AdamHarvey> Yeah I'll edit as I go.

    rachel: good enough, Adam also on ETF, shouldn't take much

    daniel: additions... benefits section, anything else?

    john: we need to add stuff
    ... e.g. showcasing what people can do with your data
    ... tutorial-like thing giving 1-2 short examples

    <AdamHarvey> The showcase could be on the eGov IG site, once we get
    it running

    john: not deep, just two sentences

    daniel: eGov Web site, separate thing, where we plan to add
    showcase, too

    john: it's not a marketing/PR doc but should be simplified
    ... and clarified in some parts, saying we are here to help people
    expose but also people who wants to consume

    sylvia: we should not mislead govs, exposing data different from
    being transparent
    ... this bit should be also clarified

    john: great point
    ... it's important to publish the raw data so others can come up
    with the right visualization
    ... that put the transparency up there

    <AdamHarvey> +1 to John and Sylvia - Perhaps we could offer a w3c
    seal of approval (sort of like the validator) to govs who do a good
    job with the transparency?

    sylvia: agree, we should keep graphics high level

Charter and Plan

    [15]http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/open

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/open

    [16]http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/81

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/track/actions/81

    [17]http://www.w3.org/2009/06/eGov/ig-charter

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2009/06/eGov/ig-charter

    [jose reviews process again, expects process to be finished by end
    Sept/mid Oct if everything goes well]

What's going on

[UK]

    <Daniel_Bennett> fyi: [18]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/xbrl/cfp.html I
    am planning on attending

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2009/03/xbrl/cfp.html

    john: talking to people at HP Labs (e.g. Stuart Williams, former TAG
    co-Chair), Jenni Tennison
    ... various problems we are finding along the way
    ... the are many issues LOD community doesn't need to care but we do
    ... e.g. how to play and experiment and develop the real thing at
    same time?
    ... how to build capabilities?
    ... how to do stuff fast enough to build on the momentum?
    ... main message: we are doing it, learning heaps and heaps

    <Daniel_Bennett> John: "we are learning"

    john: applying some of LD stuff to government is not easy, new and
    specific issues come up often
    ... we expect to release something sustantive by end of Sept?

    daniel: great to hear, but you used the phrase "we're learning", uh?

    john: tru, we're learning

[W3C XBRL]

    daniel: W3C XBRL workshop hosted by FDIC

    [19]http://www.w3.org/2009/03/xbrl/cfp

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2009/03/xbrl/cfp

    scribe: 5-6 Oct 2009, I expect to present something there

[SW Meetup in London]

    john: SW meetup in London
    ... Linked Government Data will be high on agenda
    ... 60-70 people signed up already

    [20]http://www.meetup.com/LondonSWGroup/

      [20] http://www.meetup.com/LondonSWGroup/

    <johnlsheridan>
    [21]http://www.meetup.com/Web-Of-Data/calendar/11056905/

      [21] http://www.meetup.com/Web-Of-Data/calendar/11056905/

    <johnlsheridan> 92 people coming! wow

[W3C TPAC 2009]

    F2F1: [22]http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/TPAC2008

      [22] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/TPAC2008

    [23]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/TPAC/

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/TPAC/

    <Owen> Agenda for 2009: [24]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/TPAC/

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2009/11/TPAC/

    [25]http://www.w3.org/2009/11/TPAC/#Participation1

      [25] http://www.w3.org/2009/11/TPAC/#Participation1

    [26]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC09/

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC09/

    <Owen> I was able to access the latter site and it does indicate
    which meetings are open and which the user plans to attend.

    [josema goes through summary of what TPACs are and how to
    participate]

    josema: ping me if you need help or have any questions

    john: anything else to add?

    [nothing heard]

    [ADJOURNED]

    <AdamHarvey> hasta luego!

Summary of Action Items

    [End of minutes]
      _________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [27]scribe.perl version 1.135
     ([28]CVS log)
     $Date: 2009/08/19 15:37:59 $

      [27] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [28] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 19 August 2009 15:48:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 August 2009 15:48:39 GMT