Re: Public Data Catalog Priorities and Demand

El 21/12/2009, a las 0:41, escribió:
>> Thanks Jose for your "two cents" and for the others that reacted my
>> question.
>> To make it clear, I'm quite looking for a standard cataloging format,
>> but the human understandable big picture, a visualization or easy to
>> grasp categorization/list of typical PSI datasets, maybe a "map of  
>> PSI".
>> This discussion developes the questions and indicates that there is  
>> no
>> clear answer to the questions yet.
> Yep :)


>> Some more questions...
>> * How would the "national registry of lakes", "geodata of high  
>> voltage
>> electric network", "public job vacancies" and "directory of  
>> restaurants
>> holding licence to serve alcohol" for example relate to the  
>> universe of
>> PSI?
> Interesting questions - and I started writing a long reply  
> addressing it,
> but I'm stopping to ask "how do you mean "relates to" - as in where it
> would sit? How it would be classified?

Waiting for an answer ;)

>> * If there is, let's say some thousand, datasets in, is  
>> there
>> any analysis or wild guesses of how many is missing 10 000, 50 000,  
>> 100
>> 000, 500 000?
> I'd say most, but that there is probably not as many as you'd think.  
> And
> I'm including* in that. (We have to as a group remain
> international in focus :) ) Many seem to include "views" of data in  
> the
> term "missing datasets" - I think that if one could identify what  
> datasets
> are primary (something I'll expand on once I find what you meant  
> above),
> then we could generate a lot of other datasets from these. I guess  
> what
> I'm saying is its probably just as important to ask how many  
> datasets out
> there
> are dependent on other datasets for their data.

This is something we've been wondering for a while, worths a separate  

>> * Is there any analysis what is popularily used and what is pure  
>> noise
>> and not interesting to any developers, democracy advocates or  
>> anybody?
> I know in Australia there is - it's something our Bureau of Statistics
> looks at. From memory, GIS, Labour Market and Population data are  
> popular,
> as is weather information. I'd say it's all interesting to someone.  
> "If
> you build it they will come" - ie: What would be popular if people  
> were
> able to use any dataset, if they could, or knew how, or knew what to  
> use
> it for? Prehaps its just that developers and others haven't come up  
> with
> good applications for the data yet.
> ...
> Chris

In general, I agree with Chris' rationale here. I'd say "if you build  
it, they _might_ come"
Many people in governments are worried about the use of their e-Gov  
services already on which they've invested huge amounts of money.  
Usage is, in general, low and ROI not good (yet). Yeah, I know there  
are exceptions but let me talk very generally for once.

They are even more worried about reuse of OGD. I know of several who  
have been exposing data for years that it's not been reused. Putting  
it all together at a one-stop portal might well not be enough. So this  
whole discussion is long but clearly has to take place with as many  
aprties as possible. Ask the re-users! (some are already doing so).

There's also some good news. In several projects, the first  
beneficiary is the government itself. We have already experienced  
this, consolidating data for reuse that was not consolidated  
everywhere else and thus given the government something it didn't have  
before allowing it to throw some duplicates to the trash bin.  
Government as the first re-user :-)

>> ...
>> Jose Manuel Alonso kirjoitti:
>>> My guess based on current experience is that this is not easy to
>>> compile. A national (Spain) report on eGov recently released states
>>> that the two most important information sets at regional (state)  
>>> level
>>> for citizens are: organization chart and public job vacancies.
>> Any link to that?

Sure (I haven't read the English version though)

>>> Said that, there are much more variables that have an impact in an
>>> open data project. We have identified 20+ important ones, some are
>>> technical, some are organizational, some are policy-related...  
>>> it's a
>>> tough and complicated issue.
>> Mind of sharing those 20+ at some wikipage where we could discuss  
>> those?

Received on Monday, 21 December 2009 18:16:14 UTC