Re: [odcgeneralstewardslist] IODC+ DATA ROADMAPS: Gov of Mex on Bundled Commitment on IODC & National Consultation/Roadmap on the Data Revolution for Sustainable Development

Hi Steve,

Thanks a lot for helping us to share and promote our activities on the Dataset
Usage Vocab. We are working on a new version of the vocab and as soon as a
more stable version is available, we're gonna share this with the group.

We aim to produce a vocab that's gonna be really  helpful and for this It
is important to gather feedback from the community!

cheers,
Bernadette




2015-09-14 12:06 GMT-03:00 Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>:

> Phil,
>
> Great points.  I hope those on copy will work with us (W3C) to make sure
> our Vocabulary standards have immediate real world impact.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Steve
>
> Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again"
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for Phil Archer ---09/12/2015 02:40:29
> AM---The motivation behind developing the Dataset Usage Vocab is t]Phil
> Archer ---09/12/2015 02:40:29 AM---The motivation behind developing the
> Dataset Usage Vocab is to avoid  publishers putting their data
>
>
>
>    From:
>
>
> Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
>
>    To:
>
>
> Steven Adler/Somers/IBM@IBMUS, "Jose M. Alonso" <josema@webfoundation.org>,
> DWBP Public List <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
>
>    Cc:
>
>
> Barbara Ubaldi <Barbara.UBALDI@oecd.org>, Carlos Iglesias <
> carlos.iglesias@webfoundation.org>, Daniel Dietrich <
> daniel.dietrich@okfn.org>, Marcio Vasconcelos <
> Marcio.Vasconcelos@avina.net>, "ODCstewardslist@opendatacharter.net" <
> odcstewardslist@opendatacharter.net>, sumandro <sumandro@cis-india.org>,
> Tim Davies <tim@practicalparticipation.co.uk>, "Zeitz, Paul S" <
> ZeitzPS@state.gov>, Andrew Hoppin <andrew@nucivic.com>, Kevin Merritt <
> kevin.merritt@socrata.com>, Diego May Junar <diego.may@junar.com>
>
>    Date:
>
>
> 09/12/2015 02:40 AM
>
>    Subject:
>
>
> Re: [odcgeneralstewardslist] IODC+ DATA ROADMAPS: Gov of Mex on  Bundled
> Commitment on IODC & National Consultation/Roadmap on the Data  Revolution
> for Sustainable Development
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> The motivation behind developing the Dataset Usage Vocab is to avoid
> publishers putting their data behind a registration step. I was talking
> to someone this week about the EU's Copernicus data - a huge trove of
> satellite imagery that the EC trumpets as a great example of open data.
> She was a little non-plussed when I said that, since you have to login
> and fill in a form that tells them what you plan to do with the data, it
> can't be called open.
>
> So the idea is to create not only a vocab but an incentive for data
> re-users to publish info about what they've used and what they've sued
> it for. I see two incentives:
>
> - discovery (think schema.org);
> - encouraging the publisher to keep on publishing.
>
> Being able to 'ask the Web' who's using my data and what is it being
> used for would be good.
>
> This has some resonance with the research world's activities like
> DataCite, CrossRef etc.
>
> Phil.
>
>
> On 09/09/2015 12:58, Steven Adler wrote:
> >
> > Jose,
> >
> > I don't think we need to organize more sessions at conferences to figure
> > out how to measure OD utilization.  Might be easier to just talk to
> > Socrata, Junar, NuCivic, and CKAN folks to organize common utilization
> > metrics.
> >
> > I am adding my W3C Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group
> colleagues
> > to this discussion since standardizing that metadata is within our
> mandate
> > and we are working on Data Quality and Usability Vocabularies.
> >
> > Also adding Kevin Merrit (Socrata), Diego May (Junar), and Andrew Hoppin
> > (NuCivic).  I guess there are people already on copy who can represent
> > CKAN.
> >
> > Kevin, Diego, Andrew - We are having a conversation about how to measure
> > aggregate Open Data utilization and we wonder if it would be possible to
> > agree on common metadata standards that would allow API calls to your OD
> > catalogs.  We would like to be able to add OD utilization and quality
> > statistics to common OD Supply Indexes.
> >
> > Sorry to dump you all into this long thread.  But it seems to me that
> right
> > now, while our industry is relatively small, we have the opportunity to
> > agree on common standards that could really benefit many interests.
> >
> > Could we ask you for your views on this topic?
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again"
> >
> >
> > |------------>
> > | From:      |
> > |------------>
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >    |"Jose M. Alonso" <josema@webfoundation.org>
>
>   |
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> > |------------>
> > | To:        |
> > |------------>
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >    |Tim Davies <tim@practicalparticipation.co.uk>
>
>   |
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> > |------------>
> > | Cc:        |
> > |------------>
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >    |Steven Adler/Somers/IBM@IBMUS, Daniel Dietrich <
> daniel.dietrich@okfn.org>, Barbara Ubaldi <Barbara.UBALDI@oecd.org>,
> Marcio Vasconcelos           |
> >    |<Marcio.Vasconcelos@avina.net>, "ODCstewardslist@opendatacharter.net"
> <odcstewardslist@opendatacharter.net>, sumandro <sumandro@cis-india.org>,
>   |
> >    |"Zeitz, Paul S" <ZeitzPS@state.gov>, Carlos Iglesias <
> carlos.iglesias@webfoundation.org>
>                    |
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> > |------------>
> > | Date:      |
> > |------------>
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >    |09/09/2015 06:41 AM
>
>   |
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> > |------------>
> > | Subject:   |
> > |------------>
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >    |Re: [odcgeneralstewardslist] IODC+ DATA ROADMAPS: Gov of Mex on
> Bundled Commitment on IODC & National Consultation/Roadmap on the Data
> Revolution |
> >    |for Sustainable Development
>
>   |
> >
>  >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I fully agree this is a very important debate and, as Tim mentioned and
> (as
> > most of you know) he's been deeply involved with both the CAF and the
> ODB,
> > we keep on exploring at WF. The paper he referred to was commissioned to
> > keeping on exploring the "Use" element.
> >
> > I was also intrigued about the use of household surveys and met with the
> > World Justice Project team earlier this year to learn more about their
> > method. They work with local/regional companies and survey thousands of
> > people. Besides what Tim mentioned above, two more issues come to mind:
> > time requirements and cost. Pew's and WPJ's product are not cheap and
> WPJ's
> > needs 2 years per round. Complexity of the ODB itself has increased
> > already. For example, we have introduced this year government
> > self-assessments as a new data collection component.
> >
> > I believe we all certainly need to improve how we measure "Use" but also
> > keeping in mind the perfect might be the enemy of the good.
> >
> > I'm copying my colleague Carlos as he's currently managing the ODB and
> our
> > work on the CAF and may have something else to add.
> >
> > IIRC, we have organized sessions at the last several conferences on this
> > topic and we might want to do so again soon, maybe in the context of the
> > OGP ODWG meeting at the OGP Summit or on the sides of it as I believe
> most
> > of us will be there.
> >
> > Best,
> > Josema.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2015-09-09 10:12 GMT+02:00 Tim Davies <tim@practicalparticipation.co.uk
> >:
> >    This is a really important debate: and if finding good methods for
> >    assessing levels of open data use would be very valuable.
> >
> >
> >    Across the components of the Common Assessment Method for Open Data
> usage
> >    is the least surveyed - in part due to the complexity of finding good
> >    robust sampling strategies.
> >
> >    Surveys: Reflecting on Steve's suggestions around surveys:
> >
> >    The best examples we probably have of large scale survey work in this
> >    area is either from the Pew Internet Project, which has a
> single-country
> >    US survey capturing American's awareness of Open Government
> Initiatives (
> >    http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/21/open-government-data/), and
> then
> >    the World Justice Project's multi-country survey of major cities,
> which
> >    included a number of questions for their Open Government Index (
> >    http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/opengov/) relating to citizen
> >    perceptions around their use of Right to Information mechanisms.
> >
> >    However, particularly when it comes to getting cross-country
> comparison
> >    data that is sensitive specifically to open data, as opposed to the
> >    presence of an app economy or civic technology in general, it can be
> very
> >    difficult to frame definitions in surveys in ways that produce
> reliable
> >    and comparable data.
> >
> >    One of the issues faced in the Open Data Barometer's 'Impact' method,
> >    which broadly combines a measure of use and impact (asking about the
> >    presence of stories of open data having an impact in particular
> >    settings), is that countries that spend more resource capturing case
> >    studies of use may score higher than countries who have more cases of
> >    use, but where those cases are less well documented or promoted.
> Re-use
> >    that doesn't result in high-profile apps and websites is particularly
> >    likely to be missed by both expert and public-perception surveys.
> >
> >    From a robust evidence point of view, it's would also be important I
> >    think to have independent sampling and data collection: making it
> tricky
> >    to put govts in the middle of asking citizens to fill out surveys.
> >
> >    Other approaches: Two other approaches which might be useful here:
> >
> >    (1) Refining 'data availability' metrics. As Daniel notes, most of our
> >    measures of data openness right now are not sensitive enough to data
> >    quality.
> >
> >    There is some interesting work on domain-specific measures of quality
> >    (e.g. Open Data Watch Inventory - capturing levels of disaggregation
> in
> >    nationals stats:
> >    http://www.opendatawatch.com/Pages/Open-Data-Inventory.aspx), and
> finding
> >    metrics that indicate how re-usable a dataset is likely to be (
> >    http://www.opendataresearch.org/dl/symposium2015/odrs2015-paper60.pdf
> ).
> >
> >    I've been interested in exploring whether we can find efficient
> methods
> >    for use-case driven testing of the practical openness of datasets to
> >    replace/complement the current check-list approaches used in the Open
> >    Data Barometer and Index.
> >
> >    (2) Finding and evidencing good proxy variables.
> >
> >    The Open Data Barometer includes variables on civil society capacity,
> and
> >    private sector ICT capacity, in part because it hypothesises that
> these
> >    are important ingredients of enabling re-use.
> >
> >    It would be worth testing this in a number of contexts, and exploring
> >    whether there are other better proxy variables to capture factors
> aside
> >    from data quality which are strongly associated with the presence of
> open
> >    data re-use in a country.
> >
> >    ---
> >
> >
> >    All the best
> >
> >    Tim
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >    On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 4:07 AM, Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> >     Great.  The normal way to measure utilization is through consumer
> >     preference, but that requires a menu of different consumer choices
> with
> >     price discovery.  We have a free commodity with few market
> alternatives,
> >     therefore our only option is to survey consumer opinions of open data
> >     quality, relevance, and value.
> >
> >     Not very sophisticated but it works if we can develop a short survey
> and
> >     get governments to ask users to fill it out anonymously to generate
> >     reasonable sample sizes.
> >
> >     What do people think about this?
> >
> >     Best Regards,
> >
> >
> >     Steve Adler
> >     IBM
> >
> >
> >     Daniel Dietrich --- Re: [odcgeneralstewardslist] IODC+ DATA ROADMAPS:
> >     Gov of Mex on Bundled Commitment on IODC & National
> Consultation/Roadmap
> >     on the Data Revolution for Sustainable Development ---
> >
> >   From:  "Daniel Dietrich" <daniel.dietrich@okfn.org>
> >
> >   To:    "Steven Adler" <adler1@us.ibm.com>
> >
> >   Cc:    "Barbara Ubaldi" <Barbara.UBALDI@oecd.org>, "Jose Manuel
> Alonso" <
> >          josema@webfoundation.org>, "Marcio Vasconcelos" <
> >          Marcio.Vasconcelos@avina.net>, "
> >          ODCstewardslist@opendatacharter.net" <
> >          odcstewardslist@opendatacharter.net>, "sumandro" <
> >          sumandro@cis-india.org>, "" <ZeitzPS@state.gov>
> >
> >   Date:  Tue, Sep 8, 2015 6:08 PM
> >
> >   Subjec Re: [odcgeneralstewardslist] IODC+ DATA ROADMAPS: Gov of Mex on
> >   t:     Bundled Commitment on IODC & National Consultation/Roadmap on
> the
> >          Data Revolution for Sustainable Development
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     This is a great point! At Open Knowledge we have thought about (but
> not
> >     yet found an answer) on how to add the user perspective to the Open
> Data
> >     Index, as we have found that some countries actually score relatively
> >     high in the OD index and OD barometer, but when you go and ask
> potential
> >     re-users in those countries they will tell you that the data
> published
> >     is actually useless for their work, as its lacks quality (including
> but
> >     not limited to: high level of aggregation, missing details
> >     (itemisation), low granularity, not timely, not updated, no historic
> >     data for comparison, etc). However it is very hard to capture this
> kind
> >     of feedback into an index, as these are individual statements for
> >     individual use-cases. However not having this perspective the actual
> >     indexes sometimes draw a misleading picture for some countries.
> >     Interested to hear other people thoughts. All best Daniel -- Daniel
> >     Dietrich Co-founder & Chairman Open Knowledge Foundation Germany
> >     www.okfn.de | info@okfn.de | @okfde Office:
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "ODC Stewards list" group.
> > Visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/a/opendatacharter.net/group/odcstewardslist/.
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to odcstewardslist+unsubscribe@opendatacharter.net.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
>
>
> Phil Archer
> W3C Data Activity Lead
> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1
>
>
>
>


-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------