Newmarket gets open data
Locked
Newmarket gets open data
 
|
http://open.newmarket.ca/
And they’ve already adopted the Represent CSV Schema for their elected officials’ contact information, surely the most widely adopted open government data standard in Canada http://represent.opennorth.ca/government/ _______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
signature.asc (859 bytes)
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
That is certainly one of the better looking custom licenses I've seen. They don't appear to have plain old download URLs though. You have to go through this sort of shopping cart batch process. I wonder why they decided to make the download process more difficult than usual. Certainly much more difficult to automate downloads than usual. On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Glen Newton <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
Glen, Herb: Isn't the license the same as that of the Government of Canada and of the few dozen other governments that take the same wording and just change the attribution statement, version number, license name and definition of “personal information”?
http://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada Re: downloads, I imagine they retooled some existing ecommerce software (perhaps something they had already). I agree that it makes it much harder to download programmatically.
_______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
James, While many are taking the GoC license, there are still some that are rolling their own, adding things like non-Open indemnification clauses to their terms of use, like Edmonton: http://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/Web-version2.1-OpenDataAgreement.pdfOn Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 10:05 PM, James McKinney <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
James, I believe you are right that the license is very similar to some of the others. But because it's not an an Open Definition approved license and it's also new license I have to basically go through the license word by word and and understand what is different about it from the other variants I may be aware of. Publishers should be aware that when they do theses sorts of things they are imposing an unnecessary cost on every consumer that uses their site. Newmarket has done a fairly good job. I can tell from what they have done right that they care about their impact on consumers and likely sincerely want people to use their data. I see at least two opportunities for them to do even better. The license and the obscure download mechanism. I am going with the assumption that they want their data to be used - so I hope it's useful for them to see where the obvious improvements are. Their license is much better than some we've seen in the past. I would just like to see them go one step further in adopting a common license as for example Kelowna does for example. The GoC license, while "open" itself and well as Open Definition approved, is awkward for third parties to re-use. What would be great - and I have talked with several parties about in the past, is for the next iteration of the GoC license to be reusable - so that jurisdictions like Newmarket can just use the license as-is - without any modifications, such that others could just refer to it as they do with other common licenses. This to me would be a great contribution that the GoC could make to the other jurisdictions to really raise the bar in Canada. It would provide a strong disincentive to discourage the kinds of subtle but regressive modifications we've seen from some of the sub-national jurisdictions. Herb On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Glen Newton <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
Herb, I agree with you that a common license that is reusable is the
way to go. Every time a jurisdiction "tweaks" a license they
effectively make a new unique license that can result in more
overhead and license stacking issues.
I also don't see the most important dataset (for me) -- the dataset that describes all the other datasets. ... gerry On 2016-07-11 9:57 AM, Herb Lainchbury
wrote:
_______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
Re: Newmarket gets open data
|
|
Meta! ;-) On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Gerry Tychon <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ CivicAccess-discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss |
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |