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

Re: Prepublication Public Sector Information (was: Data Mining / Cloud Computing)

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 09:02:22 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1352134942.75882.YahooMailNeo@web112615.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: "eGov IG \(Public\)" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Oops.

[3] http://www.rustprivacy.org/2011/pii/cnpii.xml

Personally Identifiable Information can hide under many names.  Any Cross-Reference fails completeness ... however, there is no reason to ignore hints.  The pii:resource element in the schema is a category pick list to aid an author in the identification of PII assumeing that the elimination of PII from Public Documents is the goal.  And it is in the US because discrimination under color of law is a criminal offence [18 U.S.C. § 242  : US Code - Section 242: Deprivation of rights under color of law].

--Gannon


________________________________
 From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>; eGov IG (Public) <public-egov-ig@w3.org> 
Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: Prepublication Public Sector Information (was: Data Mining / Cloud Computing)
 



Thanks Owen,

Public Information and the Public Domain overlap.  Firewalls block or pass data formats, not information.  The logical requirement of stewardship (the eGov version of shared ownership with NGO's) is that references to scheme names be understood on both sides of a firewall.  Data Miners and Web Search Engines haven't forgotten how to do this, they just don't want to, and they don't want eGovernments to say it was all worked out a decade or more ago.


There are two cases of broken reference, I think of them as type "Rosebud"[1] and type "Croatoan"[2].  Both complicate Open Data, but neither are format or interoperability issues.  The XML Format is is sufficient to address both issues, but fails when it comes to differentiating relavance.  The PII Namespace is a variant on "Security through obscurity".  Or, if you like, call it exactly what it is ... Security through throwing out the irrelavant.  Yes, we all understand that pictures of one's own grandchildren differ in cuteness by several orders of magnitude from others, but their inclusion in Agency Strategic Planning is problematic because another cuteness event of higher priority may occur at any moment.  How about we just leave them out, OK ?

Data Miners want to leave the grandkids pix in.  eGovernments need only say no to that "innovation".  It does not mean less (relavant) data nor does it mean that Mobile Data is less secure.  What it does mean is that Mobile Devices cannot dictate concept equivalance or naming conventions on the other side of a firebreak[3].

When a single data file is tightly bound to a license and a privacy policy, there is only one use case.

--Gannon      


[1] Sentimental but obscure attachment to a brand name.  It was a snow sled.  Get bask to work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Kane
[2] A reference name which has lost a definition.  Carved in a tree, don't know why.  Get back to work
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roanoke_Island
c.f. It's pronounced "We The People".  Get back to work.
Star Trek #54, The Omega Glory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipe5EjcchvY




________________________________
 From: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
To: 'Gannon Dick' <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> 
Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2012 8:13 PM
Subject: RE: Prepublication Public Sector Information (was: Data Mining / Cloud Computing)
 

Gannon, I dropped your schema in the InfoPath designer to see what it looks like in a UI. 

...

I still can’t make much sense of it but look forward to seeing what can be done with your work.
 
Owen

...
Received on Monday, 5 November 2012 17:02:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 5 November 2012 17:02:57 GMT