Re: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]]

The Common Logic Posse !

Best wishes,

Rick

office: 202-501-9199
cell: 202-557-1604




Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org> 
Sent by: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org
11/24/2010 03:54 AM

To
<vanEngers@uva.nl>
cc
'Thomas Bandholtz' <thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com>, Ed Summers 
<ehs@pobox.com>, W3C eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Subject
Re: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]]







> As long as we address eGov and are not overtaken again by the LOD 
maffia, you
> can count me in.

Interesting. LOD Mafia. Need to add it to my collection. Linked Data 
police
[1] is already in it. Any others?

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] 
http://richard.cyganiak.de/blog/2009/11/whats-in-a-name-and-the-linked-data-

police/

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
http://sw-app.org/about.html



> From: <vanEngers@uva.nl>
> Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:46:13 +0000 (GMT)
> To: "josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org" <josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org>,
> "MCrompton@iispartners.com" <MCrompton@iispartners.com>
> Cc: 'Thomas Bandholtz' <thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com>, Ed Summers
> <ehs@pobox.com>, W3C eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Subject: RE: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New 
Charter]]
> Resent-From: W3C eGov IG <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 08:48:35 +0000
> 
> As long as we address eGov and are not overtaken again by the LOD 
maffia, you
> can count me in.
> 
> Prof. dr. Tom M. van Engers
> Professor in Legal Knowledge Management
> University of Amsterdam/Faculty of Law
> Leibniz Center for Law
> Kloveniersburgwal 48
> Postbus 1030
> 1000BA Amsterdam
> +31 20 525 3494
> +31 20 525 2179
> www.LeibnizCenter.org
> vanEngers@uva.nl
> ------- Original Message ----------
> From: "Jose M. Alonso" <josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org>
> To: "MCrompton@iispartners.com" <MCrompton@iispartners.com>
> Subject: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]]
> 
> Hi Malcolm, all, 
> 
> It's so good to see several of the old time contributors to this list
> discussing again. Wonderful. I hope we could build on that renewed 
energy.
> 
> El 24/11/2010, a las 05:14, Malcolm Crompton escribió:
> I agree with Ed, strongly.  The eGov interest group was started in order 
to
>> connect to policy makers as well as other communities and this element 
has
>> not been very visible for some time.  Policy makers are often only just
>> coming to grips with the issues and need help at many levels.
> 
> A very strong +1 from me. This is where, IMHO, the group excelled. I was
> talking to someone the other day who congratulated me for the first Note 
we
> published as he learned about it in the references section of the UN 
eGov 2010
> Index.
> 
> It is my understanding the eGov Activity won't be just LOD, but that a 
LOD
> related WG (GLDWG) would be started within this Activity and that the IG 
would
> stay somehow. Said that, DO NOT underestimate the time commitment issue 
we
> faced (and are still facing), the "willingness meets reality check", 
i.e. I
> myself would love this happen but it's VERY tough for me to find the 
time
> cycles needed for it...
> 
> I have to apologize again as an IG co-Chair for not being as active as I
> should be. My time is really packed of Open Data projects (fortunately, 
I
> should say, in this crisis times) and the lessons learned there proved 
so far
> there's *also* strong need for a LOD-focused one.
> 
> Cheers,
> Josema.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Jose M. Alonso
> Manager, eGovernment and Open Data, CTIC
> co-Chair, eGovernment Interest Group, W3C
> Senior Advisor, W3C Spain
> Parque Científico-Tecnológico
> C/ Ada Byron, 39
> 33203 - Gijón, Asturias, Spain
> tel.: +34 984390616; +34 984291212; fax: +34 984390612
> email: josema.alonso@fundacionctic.org
> twitter: @josemalonso
> http://datos.fundacionctic.org
> http://www.w3.org/eGov/
> Privacy Policy: http://www.fundacionctic.org/privacidad
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> To illustrate with the Australian example, have a look at the new 
Office of
>> the Australian Information Commissioner which commenced operations on 1
>> November, www.oaic.gov.au.  It incorporates the previous Office of the
>> Privacy Commissioner and takes over a series of Freedom of Information
>> functions but also has a brand new responsibility for government 
information
>> policy at the Federal level here.  They are feeling their way and also 
know
>> the mountains of (passive) resistance they will meet on the way to open
>> government and open data.
>> 
>> More precisely, have a look at the Issues Paper that they have 
released,
>> which is still open for public comment.  Input from this group or its
>> members would be welcomed with open arms.  The issues paper is online 
at
>> www.oaic.gov.au/publications/papers.html. See also other speeches and 
papers
>> by the new Information Commissioner, Brian McMillan.
>> 
>> Malcolm Crompton
>> 
>> Managing Director
>> Information Integrity Solutions Pty Ltd
>> ABN 78 107 611 898
>> 
>> T:  +61 407 014 450
>> 
>> MCrompton@iispartners.com
>> www.iispartners.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org 
[mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org]
>> On Behalf Of Thomas Bandholtz
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 6:12 AM
>> To: Ed Summers
>> Cc: public-egov-ig@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]
>> 
>> Hi Ed,
>> 
>> you are perfectly right. Linked Data is not the only thing (just the 
one
>> that excites me most). It is only one of the protocols to be supported
>> by the Agencies. Feed syndication is complementary, and not less 
exciting.
>> 
>> We should select a few recommended protocolls and clarify which of them
>> serves what use case best.
>> I think Linked Data is about making data accessible, and Feed
>> Syndication is about spreading news (which might link to some 
accessible
>> data).
>> 
>> We had a similar discussion earlier, including Web Services, Web Site
>> (HTML) and PDF publishing etc etc.
>> In my personal opinion: Linked Data is going to outdate Web Services,
>> but we shouldn't focus too much on media types. Most important is we
>> have human/machine readable interfaces ("content negotiation").
>> Even publishing CSV data along with a feed or a HTML page would fulfill
>> the minimum requirements.
>> 
>> However, I feel that this group needs a really focussed charter anyway.
>> Over the last year we had a rather diffused focus and consequently
>> diffused results.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Thomas
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Am 23.11.2010 18:32, schrieb Ed Summers:
>>> I am interested in continuing participation in this group. I think
>>> having a w3c group that's focused on the use of web technologies in
>>> government is incredibly important.
>>> 
>>> However, I am not interested in the group focusing exclusively on
>>> Linked Data (aka RDF, SPARQL). I think we need to look at the role of
>>> egov in the web ecosystem in a holistic and pragmatic way. For
>>> example, I am interested in promoting the the thoughtful use of feed
>>> syndication in egov. This seems to fall outside the scope of what
>>> people typically mean when they say Linked Data. Yet I think
>>> syndication is incredibly important when it comes to timely
>>> distribution of egov information.
>>> 
>>> I'm also interested in getting government institutions to embrace
>>> putting their "hugged" databases online, with thoughtful use of URLs,
>>> with machine (as well as human) readable data at those URLs, so that
>>> we can start to get more "registries" online. Once people have made
>>> the leap to putting their data online, with persistent cool URLs, then
>>> we can start talking RDF, etc.
>>> 
>>> Perhaps I'm jumping to conclusions that there would ever be such a
>>> focus exclusively on Linked Data. I thought I heard rumblings of
>>> rechartering with a focus on Linked Data, and I would like to go on
>>> record as opposing that sort of move -- if it were to be proposed :-)
>>> 
>>> //Ed
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Thomas Bandholtz, thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com, http://www.innoq.com
>> innoQ Deutschland GmbH, Halskestr. 17, D-40880 Ratingen, Germany
>> Phone: +49 228 9288490 Mobile: +49 178 4049387 Fax: +49 228 9288491
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>