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

Thanks Richard.  I'll try to keep those in *** Privacy Denial *** off your back.

<pii:misc xmlns:pii="http://purl.org/pii/terms/">
[If you think that a different set of rules would work better (which is 
entirely possible), then it would be prudent to write them down, coin a 
new term for them, and start the legwork of advertising them, just as 
Tim did since 2006.] - Richard Cyganiak					
</pii:misc>



--- On Wed, 11/24/10, richard.murphy@gsa.gov <richard.murphy@gsa.gov> wrote:

From: richard.murphy@gsa.gov <richard.murphy@gsa.gov>
Subject: Re: IG future? [was: Re: Environmental LOD [was: Re: New Charter]]
To: michael.hausenblas@deri.org
Cc: "Ed Summers" <ehs@pobox.com>, "W3C eGov IG" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, public-egov-ig-request@w3.org, "'Thomas Bandholtz'" <thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com>, vanEngers@uva.nl
Date: Wednesday, November 24, 2010, 8:06 AM



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

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

> 

>

Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2010 15:14:38 UTC