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

RE: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]]

From: <vanEngers@uva.nl>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:46:13 +0000 (GMT)
To: "josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org" <josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org>, "MCrompton@iispartners.com" <MCrompton@iispartners.com>
Cc: 'Thomas Bandholtz' <thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com>, 'Ed Summers' <ehs@pobox.com>, "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <30284407.3217.1290588373514.JavaMail.wibapp@cnl8151.visto-mgmt.com>
As long as we address eGov and are not overtaken again by the LOD maffia, you can count me in.

Prof. dr. Tom M. van Engers
Professor in Legal Knowledge Management
University of Amsterdam/Faculty of Law
Leibniz Center for Law
Kloveniersburgwal 48
Postbus 1030
1000BA Amsterdam
+31 20 525 3494
+31 20 525 2179
------- Original Message ----------
From: "Jose M. Alonso" <josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org>
To: "MCrompton@iispartners.com" <MCrompton@iispartners.com>
Subject: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]]

Hi Malcolm, all, 

It's so good to see several of the old time contributors to this list discussing again. Wonderful. I hope we could build on that renewed energy.

El 24/11/2010, a las 05:14, Malcolm Crompton escribió:
I agree with Ed, strongly.  The eGov interest group was started in order to
> connect to policy makers as well as other communities and this element has
> not been very visible for some time.  Policy makers are often only just
> coming to grips with the issues and need help at many levels.

A very strong +1 from me. This is where, IMHO, the group excelled. I was talking to someone the other day who congratulated me for the first Note we published as he learned about it in the references section of the UN eGov 2010 Index.

It is my understanding the eGov Activity won't be just LOD, but that a LOD related WG (GLDWG) would be started within this Activity and that the IG would stay somehow. Said that, DO NOT underestimate the time commitment issue we faced (and are still facing), the "willingness meets reality check", i.e. I myself would love this happen but it's VERY tough for me to find the time cycles needed for it...

I have to apologize again as an IG co-Chair for not being as active as I should be. My time is really packed of Open Data projects (fortunately, I should say, in this crisis times) and the lessons learned there proved so far there's *also* strong need for a LOD-focused one.



Jose M. Alonso
Manager, eGovernment and Open Data, CTIC
co-Chair, eGovernment Interest Group, W3C
Senior Advisor, W3C Spain
Parque Científico-Tecnológico
C/ Ada Byron, 39
33203 - Gijón, Asturias, Spain
tel.: +34 984390616; +34 984291212; fax: +34 984390612
email: josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org
twitter: @josemalonso
Privacy Policy: http://www.fundacionctic.org/privacidad

> To illustrate with the Australian example, have a look at the new Office of
> the Australian Information Commissioner which commenced operations on 1
> November, www.oaic.gov.au.  It incorporates the previous Office of the
> Privacy Commissioner and takes over a series of Freedom of Information
> functions but also has a brand new responsibility for government information
> policy at the Federal level here.  They are feeling their way and also know
> the mountains of (passive) resistance they will meet on the way to open
> government and open data.
> More precisely, have a look at the Issues Paper that they have released,
> which is still open for public comment.  Input from this group or its
> members would be welcomed with open arms.  The issues paper is online at
> www.oaic.gov.au/publications/papers.html. See also other speeches and papers
> by the new Information Commissioner, Brian McMillan.
> Malcolm Crompton
> Managing Director
> Information Integrity Solutions Pty Ltd
> ABN 78 107 611 898
> T:  +61 407 014 450
> MCrompton@iispartners.com  
> www.iispartners.com 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Thomas Bandholtz
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:12 AM
> To: Ed Summers
> Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]
> Hi Ed,
> you are perfectly right. Linked Data is not the only thing (just the one
> that excites me most). It is only one of the protocols to be supported
> by the Agencies. Feed syndication is complementary, and not less exciting.
> We should select a few recommended protocolls and clarify which of them
> serves what use case best.
> I think Linked Data is about making data accessible, and Feed
> Syndication is about spreading news (which might link to some accessible
> data).
> We had a similar discussion earlier, including Web Services, Web Site
> (HTML) and PDF publishing etc etc.
> In my personal opinion: Linked Data is going to outdate Web Services,
> but we shouldn't focus too much on media types. Most important is we
> have human/machine readable interfaces ("content negotiation").
> Even publishing CSV data along with a feed or a HTML page would fulfill
> the minimum requirements.
> However, I feel that this group needs a really focussed charter anyway.
> Over the last year we had a rather diffused focus and consequently
> diffused results.
> Best regards,
> Thomas
> Am 23.11.2010 18:32, schrieb Ed Summers:
>> I am interested in continuing participation in this group. I think
>> having a w3c group that's focused on the use of web technologies in
>> government is incredibly important.
>> However, I am not interested in the group focusing exclusively on
>> Linked Data (aka RDF, SPARQL). I think we need to look at the role of
>> egov in the web ecosystem in a holistic and pragmatic way. For
>> example, I am interested in promoting the the thoughtful use of feed
>> syndication in egov. This seems to fall outside the scope of what
>> people typically mean when they say Linked Data. Yet I think
>> syndication is incredibly important when it comes to timely
>> distribution of egov information.
>> I'm also interested in getting government institutions to embrace
>> putting their "hugged" databases online, with thoughtful use of URLs,
>> with machine (as well as human) readable data at those URLs, so that
>> we can start to get more "registries" online. Once people have made
>> the leap to putting their data online, with persistent cool URLs, then
>> we can start talking RDF, etc.
>> Perhaps I'm jumping to conclusions that there would ever be such a
>> focus exclusively on Linked Data. I thought I heard rumblings of
>> rechartering with a focus on Linked Data, and I would like to go on
>> record as opposing that sort of move -- if it were to be proposed :-)
>> //Ed
> -- 
> Thomas Bandholtz, thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com, http://www.innoq.com 
> innoQ Deutschland GmbH, Halskestr. 17, D-40880 Ratingen, Germany
> Phone: +49 228 9288490 Mobile: +49 178 4049387 Fax: +49 228 9288491
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2010 08:46:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:44 UTC