Re: Proposal to structure new eGov IG

These are all very good points - +1.

However I can see Michael's suggestion as a way to align the group's 
activites along existing W3 efforts to maximise liason and 
implementation of these efforts into the IG's output. Rather than 
running the risks as put forward by Tom, Malcolm and Todd, I see this as 
a way to combine both approaches - organise internally in order to deal 
with, and produce external output for, issues of interest and concern to 
the Gov community that span not only technological considerations, but 
disparate policy approaches, government forms, legal systems etc.

Daniel's list, and I am guessing David's will not be too far disimilar 
in concept, essentially  form the "Issues Register" of the group. 
Picking any one of them - for instance "Publishing documents especially 
laws and regulations that can be used and cited" gives us an instant to 
do list (keeping it really simple here btw - just an example):

1) We have identified an issue of interest to the e-Gov community that 
is common to all governments at all levels.

2) The issue is passed to the TF's for workshopping and liason:

    a) eGov Interoperability TF - They could examine how this issue is
    affected by disparate systems, languages etc and the best way to
    ensure maximum usability by citizens and others through the
    application of W3 Interoperability Standards - LOD, SemWeb, Schemas,
    Citability etc. It could also examine future tech applications such
    as the Metadata Standard that TAG is working on atm. Taking an
    agnositc approach to the actual tech used by Gov's, how does a
    Government/s and/or agencies maximise interoperability regardless of
    the tech used? They would also put together a list of relevant
    contacts within and without W3 (esp. non-vendors) who are available
    to assist governments in addressing interoperability issues.

    b) eGov Accessibility TF - As above, but with a focus on
    accessibility. What steps need to be taken to ensure published
    material is accessible. How to deal with alternate accessible
    formats vs policy and legal considerations such as copyright,
    security, and authoratative formats. Using the community to produce
    accessible online versions of printed laws and regulations through
    volunteer digitisation efforts. The value of publishing the
    information over the original look, feel and formatting - why TXT
    can be more useful that PDF.

    c) eGov Social Media TF - As above but with the focus on SM. How do
    we tell people about what we are publishing. Crowdsourcing and SM
    for legislative and regulatory consultation processes. Shorteners
    and third-party apps - protecting your "brand" to promote trust and
    provenance. SEO and government publications. etc. How can SM be used
    to connect stakeholders - Gov, Citizens, Acedemia, Research and 3rd
    sector organisations.

    d) eGov Cloud Computing TF - As above etc. Publishing in the cloud.
    Many agencies, central repositories - data.gov.*, law.gov.*,
    archive.gov.*. Traditional Government Control vs CC - issues and
    impacts. etc.

    e) General IG discussion on the wider policy impacts of the issue
    that lie outside of the technological sphere. Are there any general
    better practice approaches? Is there some element of standardisation
    that can be promoted that is common to all Gov regardless of
    political system, social/public services makeup, legal system or
    level of Gov?

    f) General IG discussion on how this issue looks if being dealt with
    from a starting position rather than changing existing approaches -
    what advice do we have for emerging states who are creating a policy
    from scratch or who are only just realising that this is an issue
    for them. Liason with groups such as the UN, Web Foundation etc to
    identify the needs of such states around this issue.

3) The output from each TF is put together to form a robust and 
comprehensive IG note. This could range from a tech and 
gov/political/legal agnostic policy framework (if possible and always 
the preferred end product), or an issues paper, or a better practice 
guide. Any IG note should always include key contacts and resources, to 
assist Government in dealing with the issue and to automatically allow 
for Outreach.

Oh - suggestion - in addition, the IG could produce a monthly news 
digest of e-Gov related material from the W3 (and 
Governments/elsewhere?), with each TF using their W3 liason contacts 
with other W3 groups to collate news of relevance within thier sphere 
for inclusion.

Cheers

Chris

On 12/18/2010 1:36 AM, David Pullinger wrote:
> +1
>
> In the UK I have begun such a list over the past week in order to discuss how we take forward Government on the Internet.  I'll share that early next week.
>
> David
>
>
> David Pullinger
> Head of Digital Policy
> david.pullinger@coi.gsi.gov.uk
> 020 7261 8513
> 07788 872321
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of daniel@citizencontact.com
> Sent: 17 December 2010 14:27
> To: chris@e-beer.net.au
> Cc: Michael Hausenblas; Ed Summers; Sandro Hawke; W3C eGov IG; team-egov@w3.org; Brian Gryth; W3C eGov Interest Group (All)
> Subject: Re: Proposal to structure new eGov IG
>
> I am worried that we are becoming tech oriented rather than policy oriented. I would start out with a list of things governments do, especially that differ from commercial interests. My list would include:
> * Publishing documents especially laws and regulations that can be used and cited.
> * Publishing data in ways that the public and value add entities can use.
> * Maintaining private documents securely.
> * Establish and enhance communication between citizens and government.
> * Receive forms from the regulated citizens and entities.
> * Establishing rules of the road for online identity as needed.
> * Outlining the roles of governments in eCommerce.
>
> And there are many more. I think we will find that cloud computing (catch phrase of the day), accessibility, standards adoptions, social media tech, and other technology issues fit into each of these items in my list. I know our audience may be mainly the tech folks in government agencies, but their ability to do their jobs is based on meeting policy directives and shaping government policies.
>
> Perhaps to bring more people in who are tech oriented we need to have some structure that is convenient to them, but I think it is a mistake to not at least have a horizontal policy group that helps focus on the policy implications. This is especially important since different countries have different notions of citizen participation, privacy, regulatory structures, cultures, etc.
>
> One example is the use of HTML5. The ability to use downloaded fonts is important for non-Latin alphabets. There are accessibility advantages. There are digital rights management implications for government cost and oversight.
>
> And there is the issue of producing W3C documents that are human friendly. Which is not to say that there can also be geeked out tech manuals too. But can we address what I think is an important need that will also help with the access to our work by policy folks.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel Bennett
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Chris Beer"<chris@e-beer.net.au>
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 6:04am
> To: "Michael Hausenblas"<michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
> Cc: "Ed Summers"<ehs@pobox.com>, "Sandro Hawke"<sandro@w3.org>, "W3C eGov IG"<public-egov-ig@w3.org>, team-egov@w3.org, "Brian Gryth"<briangryth@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Proposal to structure new eGov IG
>
> Not a bad approach Michael.
>
> If it is taken up, then:
>
> While always tempted by SM - I nominate Brian Gryth as he was handling
> the original SM TF.
>
> I would like to put myself forward as a Chair candidate for the
> Accessibility TF. I'm on the WCAG working group and will be on a joint
> WAI-PF/WAI-WCAG TF in the new year, working on HTML 5. I have a good
> understanding of 508 in the US, and the various legislative requirements
> pertaining to accessibility for most countries as well. Working in web
> publishing and content delivery, I'm also keenly aware of accessibility
> issues as they relate to government, and was accepted to WCAG with this
> as my primary expertise.
>
> Cheers
>