- From: Jose Manuel Alonso <josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:54:26 +0100
- To: chris-beer@grapevine.net.au
- Cc: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, public-egov-ig <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, Daniel Bennett <daniel@citizencontact.com>
Hi Chris, all, Not sure I responded to this one. I'm finding a few messages that fell through the cracks. Apologies. I think we should show progress on this one. This might well be a deliverable of the group as a whole (improved by the work of the various subgroups) or a deliverable of the [DataMgmt] project. -- Jose El 02/02/2010, a las 13:38, Chris Beer escribió: > Hi Jose, Ed, all > > I do remember that Jose :) I refer someone around here to that gem > every couple of days (you'd think he'd take the time to book mark > it! (Semantic joke - ;P ). Seriously though - I'm wondering if a) Ed > means a real step-by-step how-to on datasets and metadata > specifically as opposed to the more general nature of the Draft doc > we've got and b) with regards to the Draft doc - either way we > really should make a priority effort (when we're not working Project > items) to finalise it. What's left to be done on it - Editing? > Review? RFC? > > Prehaps if we formalised it sooner than later as "Stable Version 1" > published in the IG space, we could actually start using the working > draft in the Wiki space and go ahead and make it a living document > in that sense, with regular releases/updates and say, 6 month > version milestones? Similiar say to how W3C standards are developed. > > My real concern at this point is that (for instance) a search on > "Publishing Open Government Data" and W3C returns over 100,000 > search results - this document is seeing wide dissemination, and VEY > likely citation. The quicker we formalise a first stable version out > of draft, the better IMO. > > I'm eager and willing to get the ball rolling here, as I'm sure > Daniel, Adam, yourself and others likely are. While it is probably > worth discussing as an agenda item in the next telecon, there is no > reason we can't kick things off now - discussion in a formal meeting > environment doesn't equal action necessarily, and technically IG > members are within scope to start editing on the Wiki if I don't > miss my mark. So who's up for it! *puts up hand and looks around the > list* > > This document has obviously become a cornerstone of our work as far > as the online public is concerned. I think we owe to our > "stakeholders" to keep it up to date and more than a draft. It will > also serve as a great overview page potentially linking in for all > of the Projects, and associated supporting documents (such as the > PDF how-to guide) that the IG produces. > > Cheers as always > > Chris > > On 2/02/2010 9:19 PM, Jose Manuel Alonso wrote: >> El 01/02/2010, a las 23:27, chris-beer@grapevine.net.au escribió: >>>> Is there room in the working groups plans to publish a w3c note >>>> that >>>> outlines simple recipes for making government datasets and their >>>> metadata available on the web? >>>> >>>> //Ed >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I think that a lot of the TF projects will cover this in some >>> regard - it >>> certainly then should be easy to collate that information into a >>> single >>> piece of documentation. As to whether it would achieve note status >>> lies >>> with the Chairs I'm guessing. >>> >>> Chris >> >> I think this is a great idea and much needed. >> >> Remember the IG published a first draft back in September: >> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-gov-data-20090908/ >> >> I hope we'll see it as a group note sometime in the future. >> >> -- Josema >> >> >
Received on Monday, 22 February 2010 16:54:59 UTC