W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > February 2010

Re: [WebTech] Types of Online Government Services - Vocabulary

From: Chris Beer <chris-beer@grapevine.net.au>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:34:46 +1100
Message-ID: <4B826BD6.1010004@grapevine.net.au>
To: W3C e-Gov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
CC: "Peristeras, Vassilios" <vassilios.peristeras@deri.org>, Mike Thacker <mike.thacker@esd.org.uk>
Mike, Vassilios

Addendum - The LGSL is certainly an impressive, holistic piece of work 
:) It really shows quite clearly the semantic web in practice - one of 
the best RL examples I've seen so far in my trollings of all things 
metadata. (Maybe its because I understand public sector terms and not 
academic examples so much ;) )

For the purposes of this discussion however, I'd guess that the Generic 
process list (http://doc.esd.org.uk/genericProcessList/1.00.html) is the 
kind of general definition of services we're looking at. We have to keep 
it general, or we'll get bogged down.

Will have a crack at a plain english mapping between lgsl:gpl and 
aglsterms:agls-service to start to determine possible 
commonalities/groupings over the coming week. Any idea how far off LGSL 
in SKOS is? However, even without that, the more of these sorts of 
public sector lists we can get hold of, the more obvious common 
groupings will appear IMO.



On 22/02/2010 9:39 PM, Chris Beer wrote:
> Hi Vassilios, Mike, all
> Oh - I'm certainly not looking to draft a new list of services. In 
> fact, I've done exactly as you have, and used a RDF/SKOS friendly 
> vocab from my own country, or elsewhere as a starting reference point 
> to spark discussion. (Thankyou for the links  - I'll check them out! 
> Curious to see if there is any different to a local gov list and a 
> federal version of same, countries aside). Mike makes the good point 
> that "that WE would consider" - definitions will vary from place to 
> place. We in Australia use a seperate vocab/ont. to specifically 
> describe business functions - and while some values are the same, they 
> have different meanings between the vocabs.
> Mike raises another good point which is also a concern with me btw - 
> "do we have a definition of service". It's something we need to define 
> within the scope of the project, and what better way than to see how 
> others already have. While I could of simply asked for links to 
> existing ones, some project or IG members may not have them in their 
> neck of the woods, so posting a basic list and getting people thinking 
> about this from a user pov is also useful.
> Vassilios - Business reference models are certainly worth looking at, 
> but do they tend to be concerned less with actual services and more 
> with service delivery functions? To be honest, I'm not completely up 
> on business reference models, and generally thought they were more 
> "Our function is to process information about 'abc' which comes to us 
> via a form, from a variety of places both on and offine" rather than 
> "You can apply for 'abc' online here using this smart form". Would 
> like to hear more about this though if I'm mistaken (and will of 
> course be reading up on them :) )
> My general feeling is rather than looking at business functions per 
> se, that we should  instead define online services and types of online 
> services (to be more specific), so we can within our project outputs 
> say, for instance -  "When providing a transaction service via a form 
> online, best practice should be 'x'. When providing a communication 
> service online (eg: discussion forum), best practice for social media 
> use is 'y'. When providing an e-commerce transaction using the mobile 
> web, best practice should be 'z'." So to speak.
> Keep the thoughts coming! And feel free to educate me. Always :)
> Cheers
> Chris
> On 22/02/2010 8:36 PM, Peristeras, Vassilios wrote:
>> Chris,
>> The UK Local Government Services List and the FEA business reference 
>> model (links here [1]) are indeed two efforts you should definitely 
>> consider before drafting a new list of services.
>> Regards,
>> Vassilios
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_reference_model
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
>> [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Thacker
>> *Sent:* 22 February 2010 11:17
>> *To:* chris-beer@grapevine.net.au
>> *Cc:* public-egov-ig@w3.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [WebTech] Types of Online Government Services - Vocabulary
>> Hello Chris
>> I'm afraid I've not followed discussions in depth so apologies in 
>> advance if my comments are naive .
>> Do we have a definition of "service"?
>> In UK local government, we have controlled lists at: 
>> http://www.esd.org.uk/standards/ That includes the Local Government 
>> Services List which can be browsed at: 
>> http://www.esd.org.uk/standards/lgsl/viewer/
>> The model is being upgraded and replaced by a richer set of 
>> lists expressed in SKOS format with relationships between them.  You 
>> can see that from the pages at: http://doc.esd.org.uk/
>> Your list contains a mixture of what we would consider to be 
>> interaction/transaction types and 'functions', ie broad service 
>> areas.  That may well be adequate for your purposes.
>> I hope this helps.
>> Mike
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 00:36, <chris-beer@grapevine.net.au 
>> <mailto:chris-beer@grapevine.net.au>> wrote:
>> Hello all
>> In keeping with the "Delivery of Government Services" part of the 
>> project,
>> the following is a potential list of online (or offline) services
>> delivered by the Public Sector. I've derived it from the AGLS Service
>> Vocabulary Scheme developed by the National Archives of Australia - link
>> below.
>> I'd like people to pull it apart, discuss it, comment on it and add to it
>> based on their own experiences and jurisdictions.
>> This will also be up for discussion as an agenda item for the Project
>> initial call on the 4th of March. Hopefully at that point it will be a
>> simple matter of acceptance by the group about groupings/categories for
>> services to give us areas to focus on. Some groupings will probably be
>> obvious (eg: e-commerce/transations) but some might not be.
>> The list here contains the values only, without scope. You can view the
>> full scheme here: http://www.agls.gov.au/documents/agls-service/
>> The NAA is welcoming suggestions and feedback on this vocabulary - there
>> may be some opportunity for some outreach out of this discussion :)
>> The basic list is as follows:
>> --------------------------
>> * Applications (general applications/requests)
>> * Benefits and entitlements
>> * Bills, rates and levies
>> * Bonds
>> * Bookings and Reservations
>> * Business Advisory
>> * Certificates
>> * Claims
>> * Communications forums (eg: chat services, listservs)
>> * Complaints and appeals
>> * Data exchange
>> * Enquiries
>> * Enrolments
>> * Financial (general e-commerce)
>> * Grants
>> * Infringements and fines
>> * Legal advisory
>> * Licences and permits
>> * Lodgements (formal statements or submissions to court, tribunal, 
>> inquiry
>> etc)
>> * Orders and Purchases
>> * Refunds
>> * Registrations
>> * Renewals
>> * Subscription
>> * Technical
>> * Tenders
>> * Testing
>> * Training
>> * Transactions
>> --------------------------------
>> I look forward to the responses, comments and thoughts!
>> Cheers
>> Chris Beer
>> Co-ordinator - WebTech Project
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/wiki/WebTech
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 11:34:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:43 UTC