W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > December 2012

RE: [DataGov-DEV] Updated Microdata to RDF Working Draft

From: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:20:42 -0500
To: "'Ed Summers'" <ehs@pobox.com>, "'egov-ig mailing list'" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Message-id: <002801cddd97$d4573e60$7d05bb20$@Ambur@verizon.net>
Thanks for the softball, Ed, w/re the publication of policy (like OMB
Circular A-11) in PDF.

It seems to me that we have *too much* policy -- in any format -- and far
too little *performance*.  

So I've been promoting the notion that we should have less "policy" and more
performance plans (and reports) -- in machine-readable format ... preferably
an open, standard, machine-readable format, like StratML.

OMB M-12-18, Managing Government Records Directive, provides a glimmer of
hope in that regard.  It is the first I recall seeing policy guidance issued
as set of goal and objective statements.
That's a good step in the right direction.

The next step is to render the original, authoritative sources of such
guidance in open, standard, machine-readable format, like this

And the next step after that is to report actual performance in an open,
standard, machine-readable format, like StratML Part 2, for indexing,
aggregation, analysis, and presentation on sites like Performance.gov (as
well as many others serving specialized communities of interest).
http://www.performance.gov/ & http://xml.gov/stratml/index.htm#Part2 

Believe me, folks, I didn't pay Ed to give me the opportunity to make these

BTW, there seems to be a plethora of "proprietary" (data stovepipe)
"dashboards" springing up in .gov agencies.  So it is unclear how many more
times the taxpayers may be expected to pay to reinvent the StratML Part 2


-----Original Message-----
From: ed.summers@gmail.com [mailto:ed.summers@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ed
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:15 PM
To: Owen Ambur
Cc: egov-ig mailing list
Subject: Re: [DataGov-DEV] Updated Microdata to RDF Working Draft

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:
> Ed, OMB's official guidance to agencies on implementation of section 
> 10 of the GPRA Modernization Act (GPRAMA) says they may use XML, JSON, 
> spreadsheets or CSVs in order to meet the requirement to publish their 
> strategic and performance plans and reports in machine-readable 
> format... but not PDF or HTML -- at least not without "enhanced 
> structural elements".[1]

I couldn't help but chuckle at how [1] is a PDF. I get your point however,
which I think reinforces mine, that there is no US federal policy that
prefers RDFa 1.1 over HTML Microdata for publishing metadata in HTML.

Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2012 03:21:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:50 UTC