W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > May 2012

Re: what do you mean, e-gov?

From: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 15:12:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAC1Gg8RpfgMpAuRwL6hoQwfSgfwMOQUju_DmNKWu55xpT3tqHw@mail.gmail.com>
To: paoladimaio10@googlemail.com
Cc: "eGov IG (Public)" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
So, I understand that this thread is about trying to pin down a more
specific definition of eGovernment --- which is interesting, because
that didn't seem to be a problem for the previous manifestation of
this IG, which led to the W3C GLD WG.

I'd like to take exception with the comment, "...Its a complex issue,
so far this IG does not seem to have a procedure in place to enable
the IG members for governance..." since the W3C eGov IG functions
within the context of the W3C and by definition has well-defined
governance. It's not perfect, but it is an effective process built on
consultation and consensus.

I guess I'd like to understand where we are headed with this
discussion. Are we ultimately trying to define a clearer eGov IG
agenda, for example?

Thanks,

John

On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
> John
>
> thanks for reminder of relevant  snippet in the charter, the discussion is
> zig zaging a bit, which is sometimes an outcome of evolutionary processes.
>
> Several questions were asked on the list in relation to the scope and
> processes of these IG,
> various threads came up to deal with these questions
>
> if i remember correctly, this particular thread attempts to get members
> provide input into how to  define e-Government (since there is no evidence
> how the existing working definition came into being, and whether such a
> working definition is relevant/useful to the list member as it is).
>
> The discussion started evaluating the relation e-government - e-democracy.
>
> According to literature (see related threads), is necessary to define
> e-government meaningfully within the context of legitimacy (as mandated by
> the UN for example)
>
> So basically,  members of this IG seem to agree that e-Government is  (and
> must be) a function of democracy,
>
> Its a complex issue,  so far this IG does not seem to have a procedure in
> place to enable
> the IG members for governance
> self referential loop [1])
>
> So, in a complex socio-technical world worldview, e-democracy is the context
> (read: constraint, boundary) for what this IG is about
>
> (Discuss?)
>
>
> PDM
>
>
> [1]  E-Government, E-Services and Global Processes: Joint IFIP TC 8 and TC 6
> International Conferences, EGES 2010 and GISP 2010, Held as Part of WCC
> 2010, Brisbane, Australia, September 20-23, 2010, Proceeding Page 66
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 4:39 PM, John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Discussions of terms like "e-Democracy" are all well and good,
>> but...methinks this is the W3C eGovernment (eGov) IG
>> <http://bit.ly/Kf6vai> and "...is chartered to serve as a connector
>> among people, especially government employees, looking for ways to use
>> or promote the use of W3C technologies to improve government services
>> and operations. We believe these technologies can provide significant
>> benefit to governments of all sizes, including city, regional, and
>> national governments (and between governments), in all parts of the
>> world. We also recognize that with new technologies and a changing
>> world, new policy concerns arise; this group will also facilitate
>> discussion to focus understanding of policy and security matters
>> related to W3C technologies..."
>>
>> Sorry to be pedantic...I'm just lost why we have this continuing thread.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Mick Phythian <mick.phythian@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks Steven,
>> >
>> > I think that's rounded enough to avoid any of the broader attributes
>> > given
>> > in other 'definitions' of e-democracy.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > Mick http://greatemancipator.com
>> >
>> > On 4 May 2012 20:56, Steven Clift <clift@e-democracy.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> As the one who coined the shortened term "e-democracy" in 1994 before
>> >> e-government, e-business, etc. were used, here is what I came up with
>> >> on
>> >> that one:
>> >>
>> >> http://dowire.org/wiki/E-democracy
>> >>
>> >> E-democracy represents the use of information and communication
>> >> technologies and strategies by democratic actors within political and
>> >> governance processes of local communities, nations and on the
>> >> international
>> >> stage. Democratic sectors/actors include governments, elected
>> >> officials, the
>> >> media, political organizations, and citizen/voters.
>> >>
>> >> To many, e-democracy suggests greater and more active citizen
>> >> participation enabled by the Internet, mobile communications, and other
>> >> technologies in today’s representative democracy as well as through
>> >> more
>> >> participatory or direct forms of citizen involvement in addressing
>> >> public
>> >> challenges.
>> >>
>> >> (Before sharing this definition, I used to simply say "e" or electronic
>> >> and any definition of democracy that you use. :-))
>> >>
>> >> Steven Clift
>> >> clift@e-democracy.org  - +1 612 234 7072
>> >> http://stevenclift.com - @democracy
>> >> http://e-democracy.org - @edemo
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mick Phythian PhD
>> >
>> > http://greatemancipator.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> John S. Erickson, Ph.D.
>> Director, Web Science Operations
>> Tetherless World Constellation (RPI)
>> <http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com>
>> Twitter & Skype: olyerickson
>>
>



-- 
John S. Erickson, Ph.D.
Director, Web Science Operations
Tetherless World Constellation (RPI)
<http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com>
Twitter & Skype: olyerickson
Received on Monday, 7 May 2012 19:12:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 May 2012 19:12:51 GMT