W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > May 2013

Re: Request for Help: US Government Linked Data

From: Eric Mill <konklone@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 20:59:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CANBOYLVuV1_npY6v9aWuCmjPA5-APdthW9ANDKM1WcURO58q1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com>
Cc: j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at, Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>, "<public-lod@w3.org> community" <public-lod@w3.org>, eGov W3C <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
I was very happy to see the discussion on the referenced LD
thread<https://github.com/project-open-data/project-open-data.github.io/pull/21>
happen,
as was everyone I talked to about it, on both sides of the issue, both in
and out of government. There are some really great comments there, and it's
going to be a useful discussion to build from.

My (completely personal, unofficial) request of the LD community, as
Project Open Data and its discussion threads grow, is to avoid a general
"summoning of the troops" to this stuff.

Most of the people on that thread, on either side of the LD issue, have
experience producing or working with government data, and that's where
their points of view are coming from. I really value that kind of
interaction. Rallying people who just believe in LD or hate LD as a matter
of principle, regardless of context, is not going to be constructive, and
is going to lead some people to tune out of those discussions.

One of the things that was made obvious to me by that thread is how
painfully easy it is for people who very much have the same awesome shared
end goals in mind - more useful government data - to talk past each other.
That only gets easier when comments get more emotional, and gauging one's
success during a debate becomes a matter of quantity rather than quality.

As I said, I really valued the thread we had - and most especially, I love
what POD is doing, and I think the US and Github are going to have a
profound impact on how the world views policy making in the long run. The
POD project is going to be looked at by governments around the world, and
they're going to evaluate POD based on the quality of those discussions
(not the outcomes).

It's going to be great to having more of those discussions with everyone
here, both about LD (and things other than LD!). There's a ton of unblazed
trails here, and I'm just so excited to see where they go.

-- Eric


On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Luca Matteis <lmatteis@gmail.com> wrote:

> The pull request was merged. Great success!
>
> Let's continue this effort by submitting more LOD pull-requests.
>
>
> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 7:15 PM, Jürgen Jakobitsch SWC <
> j.jakobitsch@semantic-web.at> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2013-05-19 at 08:19 -0700, Gannon Dick wrote:
>> > Dave,
>> >
>> >
>> > IMHO, the W3C Cookbook methods do not go far enough to define the
>> > short-term strategy game of which Americans are so fond.  The Federal
>> > Government must plan Social Policy from ante Meridian (AM) to post
>> > Meridian (PM).  Playing statistical games with higher frequencies or
>> > modified time spans is fun, but it is not Science (a Free Energy
>> > Calculation).
>> >
>> >
>> > http://www.rustprivacy.org/2013/egov/roadmap/NoMoneyInGovernment.pdf
>> >
>> >
>> > Sorry to say, for reasons given, that StratML seems the better choice
>> > for Strategic Policy Representation (rather than SKOS and RDF).
>>
>> sorry, no offence but above are two lines of total confusion...
>>
>> wkr j
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > --Gannon
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ______________________________________________________________________
>> > From: David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>
>> > To: "<public-lod@w3.org> community" <public-lod@w3.org>
>> > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 8:59 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Request for Help: US Government Linked Data
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I take it back: Don't just comment.
>> >
>> > We need to introduce pull requests into the Project Open Data
>> > documents that add Linked Data terms, examples and guidelines to the
>> > existing material.
>> >
>> > There are a few scattered RDFa references in relation to schema.org,
>> > but most of the Linked Data material has been removed from the
>> > documents.  We need to get this back in existing Linked Data efforts
>> > within the US Government might very well be hurt.
>> >
>> > Please help.  Thanks.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Dave
>> > --
>> > http://about.me/david_wood
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On May 18, 2013, at 09:16, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > Parts of the US Government have been discussing the role of Linked
>> > Data in government agencies and whether Linked Data is what the Obama
>> > Administration meant when they mandated "machine readable" data.
>> > Unsurprisingly, some people like to do things the old ways, with a
>> > three-tier architecture and without fostering reuse of the data.
>> > >
>> > > Please respond to the GitHub thread if you would like to support
>> > Linked Data:
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/project-open-data/project-open-data.github.io/pull/21
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Dave
>> > > --
>> > > http://about.me/david_wood
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> | Jürgen Jakobitsch,
>> | Software Developer
>> | Semantic Web Company GmbH
>> | Mariahilfer Straße 70 / Neubaugasse 1, Top 8
>> | A - 1070 Wien, Austria
>> | Mob +43 676 62 12 710 | Fax +43.1.402 12 35 - 22
>>
>> COMPANY INFORMATION
>> | web       : http://www.semantic-web.at/
>> | foaf      : http://company.semantic-web.at/person/juergen_jakobitsch
>> PERSONAL INFORMATION
>> | web       : http://www.turnguard.com
>> | foaf      : http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard
>> | g+        : https://plus.google.com/111233759991616358206/posts
>> | skype     : jakobitsch-punkt
>> | xmlns:tg  = "http://www.turnguard.com/turnguard#"
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
@konklone <http://twitter.com/konklone> | konklone.com |
sunlightfoundation.com | awesomefoundation.org
Received on Saturday, 25 May 2013 10:35:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:43:28 UTC