- From: George Thomas <george@thomas.name>
- Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:57:40 -0400
- To: "Novak, Kevin" <KevinNovak@aia.org>
- Cc: David Pullinger <David.Pullinger@coi.gsi.gov.uk>, daniel@citizencontact.com, Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>, Betsy Fanning <bfanning@aiim.org>, Arthur Colman <colman@drybridge.com>, Steven Clift <clift@e-democracy.org>, johnpaul.deley@eia.doe.gov, "Adam J.' 'Schwartz" <aschwartz@gpo.gov>, Metagovernment Startup Committee <start@metagovernment.org>, Jane Harnad <jane.harnad@oasis-open.org>, Sylvia Webb <sylvia.webb@vision4standards.com>, eGovIG IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <6326c6c10910080557h4e75b73fs91019ce4cf4fe77f@mail.gmail.com>
+1 David! -g On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Novak, Kevin <KevinNovak@aia.org> wrote: > David, > > Great stuff, thanks for forwarding on. > > Kevin > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Pullinger > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:51 AM > To: daniel@citizencontact.com; Owen Ambur > Cc: 'Betsy Fanning'; Arthur Colman; 'Steven Clift'; > johnpaul.deley@eia.doe.gov; Adam J.' 'Schwartz; 'Metagovernment Startup > Committee'; 'Jane Harnad'; Sylvia Webb; 'eGovIG IG' > Subject: RE: Public meeting agendas, minutes and XML > > I agree with Daniel's response. > > Here in UK we have developed some RDFa for public sector consultation > descriptions for the same reason which is to enable human-readable > content to be machine processable. This will not only allow many to > re-use the information appropriately for the services they want to > offer, but also gives the government a means of aggregating a list of > all the consultations into one place to find out how citizens and > stakeholders can contribute to consultations. You can find the draft > standard we are using at: > http://code.google.com/p/argot-hub/wiki/ArgotConsultation > > A lot of work that has been done in developing the XML can be re-used > for RDFa - for example all the business analysis of what information is > worth identifying as separate elements and what end-users and developers > want to be able to do with it at the end is some of the most > time-consuming parts of the overall work, preceding the development of > the appropriate ontology. > > For interest, although irrelevant to this strand, we have also developed > a Job Vacancy Description RDFa which is in use across various parts of > the UK public sector. This allows and encourages re-use by third > parties, which increases accountability and reduces cost to the taxpayer > in filling posts. You can find it at: > http://code.google.com/p/argot-hub/wiki/ArgotJob > > Kind regards, > > David > > > > David Pullinger > david.pullinger@coi.gsi.gov.uk > Head of Digital Policy > Central Office of Information > Hercules House > 7 Hercules Road > London SE1 7DU > 020 7261 8513 > 07788 872321 > > Twitter #digigov and blogs: www.coi.gov.uk/blogs/digigov > > > > >>> <daniel@citizencontact.com> 07/10/2009 12:17 >>> > I think that any meeting information should be in XHTML since that is > the human readable form that people actually read and will use. It is > easy then to make the same web page be machine processable. There are > already widely accepted standards for much of the event, GIS, textual, > video and other components of a meeting. > > For example, the web page can include RDFa and/or Microformats for all > of the information as well as link to iCal/vcard and other non-human > readable formats for backwards compatibility. The page URL for that web > page can also be used as a metadata nugget for tagging/citing things > that happen at the event. And you can use id attributes to allow parts > of the meeting to be found (e.g.. > http://example.gov/20100217/meeting.htm#agenda-1 )/or even to have > multiple events in the same page. And then those portions of the meeting > can be separately tagged/cited (note that pure XML non-HTML document is > harder to cite from within an HTML doc-see XLINK). > > If for some reason it feels necessary to create new standards in XML for > this data, I would recommend ALWAYS using a standard XSLT into XHTML and > then including all the Microformat and/or RDFa standards in the > resultant/generated XHTML. The XHTML would could exactly as described as > above. This way there would not need to be the segregation of data from > humans. > > Also some interesting work has been done on creating transcripts of > videotaped meetings in a crowd sourced manner and for public posting of > meetings by metavid and openmeetings. > > Daniel Bennett > > eCitizen Foundation > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Owen Ambur" <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> > Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 8:55pm > To: "'Steven Clift'" <clift@e-democracy.org>, "'eGovIG IG'" > <public-egov-ig@w3.org> > Cc: JohnPaul.Deley@eia.doe.gov, "'Schwartz, Adam J.'" > <aschwartz@gpo.gov>, "'Betsy Fanning'" <bfanning@aiim.org>, "'Jane > Harnad'" <jane.harnad@oasis-open.org>, "Arthur Colman" > <colman@drybridge.com>, "Sylvia Webb" > <sylvia.webb@vision4standards.com>, "'Metagovernment Startup Committee'" > <start@metagovernment.org> > Subject: RE: Public meeting agendas, minutes and XML > > Steven, I don't know how much time I might be able to devote to it, but > since I have long believed there should be a standard XML schema (XSD) > for posting meeting notices on the Web, I'd have a hard time not > participating in any reasonable effort to specify such a standard. > > While the initial iteration of the standard should be as simple and easy > to implement as possible, it would be good to consider enabling > referencing of the <Identifiers> for goals and objectives documented on > the Web in conformance with AIIM's emerging Strategy Markup Language > (StratML) standard. See http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm & > http://xml.gov/stratml/draft/StratMLGlossary.xml#Identifier > > Since meetings are (or at least should be) conducted to support > accomplishment of explicitly identified goals and objectives, it would > be good if meeting notices and agendas could reference those goals and > objectives -- which should themselves be documented in standard, readily > referenceable XML format on the Web (e.g., StratML). > > Needless to say, that is an objective to which I will be more than happy > to contribute to the best of my ability. > > BTW, as you may recall, E-Democracy.org's plan is in the StratML > collection at http://xml.gov/stratml/drybridge/index.htm#Other or, more > specifically, http://xml.gov/stratml/drybridge/eDo.xml > > > Owen Ambur > Co-Chair Emeritus, xmlCoP > Co-Chair, AIIM StratML Committee > Member, AIIM iECM Committee > Invited Expert, W3C eGov IG > Communications/Membership Director, FIRM Board Former Project Manager, > ET.gov > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Steven Clift > Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 4:38 PM > To: eGovIG IG > Subject: Public meeting agendas, minutes and XML > > I am putting final touches on an invited grant proposal that includes an > effort to make public meeting agendas more accessible as well as > encourage discussion of agenda items across the Web 2.0 world in a more > structured and visible way. Folks should be able to plunk in their > address and be told in one place (actually lots of places from local > media sites to government sites) what meetings are coming up across ALL > the local government organizations that serve them (with state and > Federal options too) and be able to set-up personalized notification > options. > > Initially, we'd start with an open specification/convening process where > we'd involve a number of stakeholders and I would like to appropriately > suggest we will consult with this network on standards to apply or > consider. > > Any reason I shouldn't do that? > > Then, based on the specification we'd attempt to prototype it with some > serious meeting notice/calendar, agenda, minutes, and links to meeting > document scraping across Minneapolis and perhaps St. Paul. > Ideally, a standard would emerge for governments to simply put out this > data in real-time in XML so scraping is only an interim need ... > although with 30,000 local governments in the U.S. and lots of crowd > sourcing, the scraping will be the only way to get many small > governments into the service for many years. > > The modest proposal we are developing is a sub-set of the broader > discussion Participation 3.0 draft we have from here: > http://e-democracy.org/P3 > > If you like this idea and would like to volunteer your expertise or > technology talent, let me know! It will make it far more likely the > idea will get off the ground sooner than later and not be another > isolated service coming from out of the blue. E-mail me at: > clift@e-democracy.org > > I'll let the group know if we succeed with our proposal. > > Steven Clift - http://stevenclift.com > Executive Director - http://E-Democracy.Org <http://e-democracy.org/>Donate today: > http://e-democracy.org/donate > > > > > > > > > > > This communication is confidential and copyright. > Anyone coming into unauthorised possession of it should disregard its > content and erase it from their records. > > The original of this email was scanned for viruses by Government Secure > Intranet (GSi) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Cable & > Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. > On leaving the GSI this email was certified virus free. > The MessageLabs Anti Virus Service is the first managed service to > achieve the CSIA Claims Tested Mark (CCTM Certificate Number > 2006/04/0007), the UK Government quality mark initiative for information > security products and services. For more information about this please > visit www.cctmark.gov.uk > > > > -- OSS ( WOA, SOA, MDA, BPM, SNS, LOD )
Received on Friday, 9 October 2009 21:12:59 UTC