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

Re: PLOS & StratML

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:41:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1351006870.39575.YahooMailNeo@web112616.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: Andre Cusson <acusson@01COMMUNICATIONS.com>, Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
Cc: 'Jay Fohs' <Jay.Fohs@marklogic.com>, "'eGov IG \(Public\)'" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Beautiful Portal, Andre :-)

I should mention that I am not affiliated with PLoS, but rather an (aging) PubMed Groupie.

My local validation/editing tool will be ready tomorrow.  You were "supposed to" be able to edit XML with any text editor, but the validation files are decentralized, interlinked and assume one is always online. It is my feeling that people who want to comment on/contribute to organizational strategies are  serious and want to be taken seriously - but that does not let them off the hook for following interoperability Standards like XML.  There is a huge difference between privacy and confidentiality.  By and large, serious people do not confuse the two.

Yes, Owen, I get the "vision".  Really.  I think it would be helpful to tie the GUID's to Concepts (URL aliases, Linked Data, whatever), and a nice tool for that is the D2RQ Server. It is my understanding that this was developed primarily to speed conversion of legacy relational database installations.  In the case of StratML, the "legacy" does not exist.  I'll provide the legacy (database tables structure) but the real work is inserting the Concept URL Mappings.  I'd start with the Library of Congress Subject Headings.

--Gannon




________________________________
 From: Andre Cusson <acusson@01COMMUNICATIONS.com>
To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> 
Cc: 'Gannon Dick' <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>; plos@plos.org; 'Jay Fohs' <Jay.Fohs@marklogic.com> 
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 5:52 AM
Subject: Re: PLOS & StratML
 

Hi Owen, Everyone,

The PLOS StratML document has been converted to StratML Part2 as
    well as added and rendered to its Web site on the StratML portal, at
http://stratml.hyperbase.com/PLOS.html

As usual, all StratML documents are also available for editing, in
    preloaded StratML Part2 forms, from the "Edit" link beside the
    corresponding entry in the alphabetical StratML document list at
http://stratml.hyperbase.com/documents.html.

The other StratML portal indexes have also been updated accordingly,
    as well as the stakeholders and statistics pages, respectively at
http://stratml.hyperbase.com/stakeholders.html
http://stratml.hyperbase.com/statistics.html

Regards,

Andre Cusson
514 583 0601
01 COMMUNICATIONS




 
>Gannon, StratML files can be shared by posting them anywhere on the Web and most of the elements contained in them can be referenced by their GUIDs, regardless of where they reside on the Web.  
> 
>The <Relationship> element of StratML Part 2 can be used to associate (link) any <PerformanceIndicator> with any other element (e.g., goals and objectives) in any StratML document anywhere on the Web.
> 
>The reason for exploring prospects for implementing the StratML standard in wikis is to enable StratML files to be collaboratively authored and edited.
> 
>In StratML Part 3, we are planning to include a <PlaceName> element, which could be used to cite county and city names as well as other named places.
> 
>Thanks for calling PLOS to my attention.  Their about statement is now available in StratML format at http://xml.gov/stratml/drybridge/index.htm#PLOS or, more specifically, http://xml.gov/stratml/carmel/PLOSwStyle.xml It would be good if scientific journals were to include references to the public goals and objectives supported by the research covered in each article.  The StraML standard can facilitate such referencing.  The vision of the standard is:  A worldwide web of intentions, stakeholders, and results.  Its more explicit purposes are outlined at http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#DefinitionPurposes 
> 
>Owen Ambur
>Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee
>Co-Chair Emeritus, xml.gov CoP
>Communications/Membership Director, FIRM
>Former Project Manager, ET.gov
>Invited Expert, W3C eGov IG
> 
>From:Gannon Dick [mailto:gannon_dick@yahoo.com] 
>Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 3:08 PM
>To: Owen Ambur
>Cc: Brand Niemann
>Subject: Re: OpenOffice, LibreOffice, GoogleDoc & Other Alternatives to MS Office
> 
>Actually, yes you can validate with user defined XSD's in both.  My litmus test has always been the database capabilities.  You can't do Linked Data properly* without "Foreign Keys", and ACCESS or DBM can't handle Foreign Keys.  In the US there are 4000 something Counties and 28000 something Cities.  StratML doesn't need to say that, but it needs to know that.
>
>I mentioned RUST (Redact Unless Static Text) earlier.  I
              made some XSL Stylesheets for StratML which 1) indent 2)
              set for local or remote validation 3) delete XML/HTML
              comments 4) redact "tagged marginalia".  I'm testing them
              now.  I found no problems at all with the XSD Schema, but
              many errors in instances.  Usually it's the other way
              around :-)   This is XML processing and does not affect or
              change StratML in any way.
>
>Seems to me that if the point is to facilitate sharing
              StratML, that a collation in Journal Format from NIH is a
              better option than Wikis.  Scientific Publishing, thanks
              to NIH, has much better separation from Media Economic
              Model concerns. c.f. http://www.plos.org/
>
>Dr. Niemann how about a story on PLoS "Open Access Week?"
>
>--Gannon
>
>* (Gannon's Dictionary) properly="demonstrably complete
              versus comparatively better at (possibly) misleading
              benchmarks".  There is a famous "New Yorker" Cover
              depicting a view from a mid-town Manhatan Highrise
              complete with little island like things in the distance
              ... labeled "Chicago", "California", "New Jersey", etc.,
              which says it all.
> 
> 
>
>________________________________
>
>From:Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
>To: 'Gannon Dick' <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> 
>Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 9:58 PM
>Subject: OpenOffice, LibreOffice, GoogleDoc & Other Alternatives to MS Office
>
>
>
>Gannon, I started doing some research and am not encouraged by what I’m seeing.  The impression that I’m getting is that none of the alternatives to the MS Office Suite are up to snuff and may not be worth my time.  It doesn’t appear that either of OpenOffice or LibreOffice have any particular affinity for user-defined XSDs, like StratML.
> 
>http://betanews.com/2012/02/14/libreoffice-3-5-pushes-past-openoffice-not-recommended-for-biz-users/
>http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/apache-openoffice-3-4-makes-official-debut-libreoffice-makes-its-case/10915
>http://www.pcworld.com/article/2010005/5-free-open-source-alternatives-to-microsoft-office.html 
>http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/07/libreoffice-and-openoffice-org-one-year-after-the-schism/
>http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=114296
>http://www.infoworld.com/d/applications/open-office-dilemma-openofficeorg-vs-libreoffice-716
>http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/272430/libreoffice-fires-shots-across-openoffice-bow
>http://www.openlogic.com/wazi/bid/188115/LibreOffice-vs-OpenOffice-org-Showdown-for-Best-Open-Source-Office-Suite
> 
>One of the articles cites Google Docs as an alternative and its reference to Google Forms caught my attention.  However, it does not appear that Google Docs is up to the task of enabling the creation of StratML files, with repeating elements. http://support.google.com/docs/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=87809 (MS InfoPath automatically creates forms from XML schemas, including automatically enabling the insertion of repeating elements.  I use it as a rapid application development tool to test additions and changes to the StratML schema.  The XForms community is supposed to be working on similar capability.  It appears that Alfresco may have had it but is not longer supporting it: http://wiki.alfresco.com/wiki/WCM_Forms_Developer_Guide
> 
>Based upon my exchange with Brand, I am curious to know if MindTouch can support the StratML schema, but I am skeptical about that and don’t want to waste my time pursuing something I don’t believe is likely to work out.  In my past exchanges with them, they have not shown any apparent desire to support StratML. 
> 
>Owen
> 
>From:Owen Ambur [mailto:Owen.Ambur@verizon.net] 
>Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 4:06 PM
>To: 'Gannon Dick'
>Subject: RE: StratML Wiki?
> 
>Gannon, I may wish to download OpenOffice or LibreOffice to check out how they deal with XForms, specifically Joe & Andre’s StratML forms.  
> 
>Do you have any basis on which to recommend one over the other?
> 
>Owen
> 
>From:Gannon Dick [mailto:gannon_dick@yahoo.com] 
>Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 11:14 AM
>To: Owen Ambur
>Cc: 'Jeanne Holm'; daniel@citizencontact.com; 'Andre Cusson'; 'Jay Fohs'; 'Joe Carmel'; 'Pradeep Jain'; 'Sandro Hawke'; Tomasz Janowski
>Subject: Re: StratML Wiki?
> 
> 
>Hi Owen,
>
>First, apologies to Daniel Bennett.  I
                                  had a minor agequake and said Frank
                                  Bennett who is a Law Professor (in
                                  Japan?) involved with the Zotero
                                  Project.  By the way, this is the
                                  browser plug-in StratML needs to add
                                  Legal References[1]. "Citation of
                                  relevant legal or other authorities" (StratML Glossary).  Citation syntax is a quasi-Art-Form which long preceeds XML.  Academia will be in the streets with torches and pitchforks if you propose a "good enough" solution.
>
>Second, my understanding of Wikis is
                                  as a presentation and aggregation
                                  format.  In general those formats are
                                  not intended to be transformable. 
                                  That being the case, perhaps Calibre
                                  or Sigil to include eBook formats
                                  would be more flexible choices. 
                                  Unfortunately my Nook was pinched by
                                  persons unknown recently, which makes
                                  QC difficult.
>
>Third, XForms are supported directly
                                  by both LibreOffice and OpenOffice. 
                                  That would be an easy route to
                                  structured formatting.  Large database
                                  tables of linked data identifiers
                                  (references and citations) are easier
                                  to maintain with SQL.  Access time is
                                  a secondary consideration.  So ACCESS
                                  and DBM are less appropriate.
>
>Fourth, the NIST XML Instance
                                  validator[2] is a good idea.  I use
                                  Xerces (one of the choices) locally. 
                                  Doing local validation consistently
                                  makes me sound less stupid, or at
                                  least makes my tinfoil hat fit better.
>
>--Gannon
>
>
>[1] http://www.zotero.org/ 
>[2] http://syseng.nist.gov/b2bTestbed/projects/xmlvalidation/PublicServlet?action=show_instance_page
> 
>
>________________________________
>
>From:Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
>To: 'Gannon Dick' <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> 
>Cc: 'Jeanne Holm' <jeanne.m.holm@jpl.nasa.gov>; daniel@citizencontact.com; 'Andre Cusson' <acusson@01COMMUNICATIONS.com>; 'Jay Fohs' <Jay.Fohs@marklogic.com>; 'Joe Carmel' <joe.carmel@comcast.net>; 'Pradeep Jain' <Pradeep.Jain@ictect.com>; 'Sandro Hawke' <sandro@w3.org>; Tomasz Janowski <tj@iist.unu.edu> 
>Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 10:53 PM
>Subject: RE: StratML Wiki?
> 
>Gannon, the truth is that I’m not sure that wikis are designed to handle well-structured authoring (i.e., conformance with a schema like StratML) but I’d love to learn that they can be used for such purposes.
> 
>This evening, using Joe Carmel’s XForms form, I compiled a more complete rendition of Jeanne’s draft, in StratML Part 1, Strategic Plan, format, at http://xml.gov/stratml/drybridge/index.htm#SMG or more specifically, http://xml.gov/stratml/carmel/SMGwStyle.xml 
> 
>If a wiki interface can handle schema-driven authoring and crowdsourced editing, Jeanne’s draft might be a good candidate for demonstration of such capabilities.  However, since Daniel Bennett has agreed to act as the lead author, presumably, he and Jeanne will determine where to post the draft and how to enable collaborative authoring of it.
> 
>Note that since StratML files are XML, they can be opened in MS Word (or Excel or PPT or Access).  I don’t have OpenOffice or LibreOffice, but I hope and trust they can open and edit XML files as well.  Again, however, I doubt they are well suited to well structured authoring and editing, without a plug-in like ICTect’s.  (It might be easy enough to edit the text between the tags, but I doubt that additional elements can easily be inserted.  Again, I’d love to learn otherwise.)
> 
>Regarding Jeanne’s draft, it seems to me there are two layers of opportunity to use StratML to add value to it:
> 
>First, once Andre Cusson has ingested it into his StratML portal, his form could be used to flesh out the names and roles of those who have agreed to help draft and edit each section. 
>Second, when the draft is in near-final form, it could be edited to become a model performance plan, with model roles and performance metrics, that any agency could take and edit to become its own actual performance plan.
> 
>Just some wild ideas.  I suspect that the draft will be prepared, as usual, in relatively unstructured form and that it will be up to someone like me to render it in an open, standard, machine-readable format like StratML… but I’d love to learn otherwise.
> 
>Owen
> 
> 
>From:Gannon Dick [mailto:gannon_dick@yahoo.com] 
>Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 4:46 PM
>To: Owen Ambur; eGov IG (Public)
>Subject: Re: StratML Wiki?
> 
>Hi Owen,
> 
>I told you I'd help you out with implementation when the time came.  I guess time has come.
> 
>At present, with no modifications, it is possible to import a MSWORD document into LibreOffice[1] and export a MediaWiki (text) file.  This need not even be saved, but can be copied and pasted into the W3C Wikis (provided they still work the same as the last time I used them a few years ago).
> 
>Frank Bennett has some good points though (especially that intrigueing "pencil and paper" technology).  I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I got the impression that he was concerned about the ability to control creative output without formal DRM.  I've always preferred the transparent nuclear redaction option myself (RUSTprivacy).  With a format change from XML to MediaWiki there is no reason to consider data recovery (or RDF for distribution - don't tell ernadette-BAY yland-HAY).  In fact, it's harmful - a farmer digging up plants to "see how the roots are doing".  My short comment about the "Flat Earth" was really about a Flat Time analog being dangerous to strategic planning progress.  Congress proves that even BAD things take time.
> 
>Other aspects of local machine creation, like local validation of not-ready-for-primetime observations are cookbook stuff, but you can't assume your friendly vendor will automatically give you a pencil and paper quarentine.  The NSA has been all over this for years[2].  Me too[3].
> 
>If you don't want to use LibreOffice, or OpenOffice, then you can consider embeding StratML in a bibliographic citation of XHTML ... XSD schemas are chainable[4].  Or, use the National Library of Medicine's JATS[5] as a wrapper.  Or even DWML from the National Weather Service (nobody beats those people for compartmentalizing tactical information which might otherwise be used as permanent strategy decorations).
> 
>If you could let me know in very rough terms what you want to be able to do, I could get started.
> 
>--Gannon
> 
>[1] http://www.documentfoundation.org/
>[2] http://www.nsa.gov/ia/_files/support/I733-028R-2008.pdf
>[3] http://www.rustprivacy.org/TakingWorkHome.pdf
>[4] http://www.rustprivacy.org/FunForLibrarians.pdf
>[5] http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/archiving/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>________________________________
>
>From:Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
>To: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com> 
>Cc: acusson@01COMMUNICATIONS.com; 'Betsy Fanning' <BFANNING@AIIM.ORG>; 'Jay Fohs' <Jay.Fohs@marklogic.com> 
>Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 11:52 AM
>Subject: StratML Wiki?
> 
>Gannon, w/re our exchange during the W3C eGov IG’s IRC (except below) this morning, I look forward to learning if you can help create a wiki interface for the StratML standard.  
> 
>If so, I’d suggest that you start with the elements of StratML Part 1 and leave the additional complexity associated with Part 2, much less Part 3, till later.
> 
>Owen Ambur
>Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee
>Co-Chair Emeritus, xml.gov CoP
>Communications/Membership Director, FIRM
>Former Project Manager, ET.gov
>Invited Expert, W3C eGov IG
> 
>…
>[12:04] <Owen> Jeanne's draft objectives are now available in StratMLformat at http://xml.gov/stratml/carmel/OSMG.xml
>[12:04] <Jeanne_> Thanks Owen
>[12:04] <olyerickson> Q: Can this doc be W3C wikified in a W3C acceptable way?
>[12:05] <Jeanne_> DanielBennett: Created a document before with lead people for each section, and separate meetings that helped to work the editorial process
>[12:05] <olyerickson> Not sure what the work product DanielBennett is referring to might be
>[12:06] <Owen> I have tried to engage wiki vendors in incorporating the StratML standard into their services ... thus far without discernable results
>[12:06] <olyerickson> * specifics I mean
>[12:06] <olyerickson> Q: What is "the format" A "Group Note?"
>[12:06] * olyerickson is trying to decide what we just decided to do
>[12:07] <olyerickson> s/decide/understand/
>[12:07] <olyerickson> DanielBennett: Time constraints need to not be
"loosey-goosey"
>[12:07] <olyerickson> +1 to helping (assuming I understand what I'm helping on)
>[12:08] <GannonDick> Owen, maybe I could help with a Strat
>[12:08] * PhilA Jeanne_ and Daniel are agreeing to work on the doc - nad you just agree to help olyerickson :-)
>[12:08] <GannonDick> ml to
>[12:08] * olyerickson I agreed to help but I don't know what I'm helping on
>[12:08] <GannonDick> oo which exports
>[12:08] <DeirdreLee> +1 for information and data sharing section
>[12:08] <GannonDick> media wiki
>[12:09] <olyerickson> Q: Will this be W3C hosted []yes []no
>[12:09] <PhilA> Let me or Sandro know if and when you want to book a slot on the Zakim bridge
>[12:09] <olyerickson> Q: Will this be in wiki format []yes []no
>[12:09] <GannonDick> q+
>[12:09] * Zakim sees GannonDick on the speaker queue
>[12:09] <PhilA> Yes, olyerickson, it will be W3C hosted
>[12:09] <olyerickson> Q: Will this be public from the start []yes []no
>[12:10] <Jeanne_> It is public right now.
>[12:10] <Owen> I will contribute in any way that I can, both in format and substance
>[12:10] <olyerickson> DeirdreLee: Will contribute information & data sharing
>[12:10] <PhilA> ack GannonDick
>[12:10] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
>[12:10] <Jeanne_> I would think we should keep it transparent, although as it moves through some iterations it make be in discussion.
>[12:10] <olyerickson> GannonDick: Can do StratML magic to it
>[12:10] <Owen> Gannon, you are already referenced at http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#Part3
>[12:11] <Owen> Will look forward to seeing StratML wikified
>[12:12] <PhilA> q+
>[12:12] * Zakim sees PhilA on the speaker queue
>[12:12] * olyerickson hopes the process/tools are web based
>[12:12] <PhilA> ack me
>[12:12] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
>[12:12] <Jeanne_> ack PhilA
>[12:12] * Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
>[12:12] <DanielBennett> http://www.w3.org/TR/gov-data/
>[12:12] <olyerickson> PhilA: Encourages us to not be scared
>[12:13] <olyerickson> Q: Does W3C process even apply (if this is not a Recommendation(tm) )
>[12:13] <olyerickson> sandro: Every contributor MUST be a member of the group and follows IP policies
>[12:14] <olyerickson> Jeanne_: Initiate group member list etc yada yada
>[12:14] <olyerickson> DanielBennett: The wiki platform does a great job
>[12:14] <Jeanne_> yada yada = make sure people have agreed to W3C intellectual guidelines and policies
>[12:14] <olyerickson> * even "pencil and paper" (definition? ;) )
>[12:15] <olyerickson> PhilA: If tehre is something you need/want control over, DON'T contribute it...
>[12:15] <olyerickson> DanielBennett: If you contribute, your name will be listed (but not good for tenure... )
>[12:15] <olyerickson> Jeanne_: (garbled)
>[12:16] <olyerickson> Topic: Wrapup
>[12:16] <DanielBennett> yw
>[12:16] <olyerickson> Thanks all around
>[12:16] <olyerickson> Special thanks to DanielBennett ( Jeanne_ owes him a pint)
>…
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2012 15:41:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 October 2012 15:41:44 GMT