RE: Open Government data

I agree with Dave, but possibly for different reasons.  In government,
one can broadly classify information exchange formats as:

 

1. Messages (aka protocols, web services, data exchanges, etc.)

2. Forms

3. Documents

 

PDF fits easily into categories 2 and 3, not 1, so the negative
statement regarding PDF in the context of "Messages" is misplaced.  It
is comparing apples and oranges.

 

Whether or not PDF is the right government "standard" for 2 and 3 is a
different question.  

 

Finally, if you can avoid making a negative statement, it is probably
better.

 

Thanks,

 

Todd

===========================
Winchel "Todd" Vincent III
<xmlLegal> http://www.xmllegal.org/ 
Phone : 404.822.4668
Fax     : 770.216.1633
Email : Todd.Vincent@xmllegal.org

 

This message including any attachments and links to outside resources
contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and
purpose and is protected by law.  If you are not the intended recipient,
please delete this message.  Disclosing, copying, or distributing this
message, or the taking of any action based on it, is prohibited without
permission. 

 

From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dave McAllister
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 5:36 PM
To: public-egov-ig@w3.org
Subject: Open Government data

 

In light of the discussion on standards  and with respect to the
Semantic Web 

The current draft still includes the negative reference as follows:


"Governments would need to publish the required interfaces so third
parties could query their information in distributed Web applications.
This could provide huge benefits:

Publishing a PDF document on a portal provides almost no means for
automation - where Semantic Web would indeed provide a high degree of
automation.
While current technologies (Web Services, REST, etc.) provide such
automation, public administrations need to create some set of queries
and offer them as an API. This provides value, but requires design - and
the decision on which queries are supported (and which not). It is
impossible to foresee all the scenarios of data usage, so usage is
therefore limited."

I am concerned that the representation of PDF here is unfair. While not
an expert in the Semantic Web, the experts within Adobe assure me such
statement is misleading and does not reflect the current capabilities of
PDF. 

Can we remove such reference, perhaps replacing it with 

Publishing a static document on a portal provides a uniquely challenging
effort for automation - where Semantic Web constructs would indeed
provide a high degree of automation easily.

davemc
-- 
Dave McAllister
Director, Standards and Open Source
650-523-4942 (GC)
408-536-3881 (Office)
Dwmcallister (Skype, Aim, YIM)
http://blogs.adobe.com/open