Splash screen

i think it's great!  thanks hugh

On 3/28/06, Hugh McGuire [hidden email] wrote:

Here is my proposal for the intro text - might as well be on the front
page (?), but it's modified from the "about" on the wiki. For the
landing page, it would need more info. for consideration:
****

Accès Civique/Civic Access (ACCA) believes that government-collected
civic data should be free for citizens to use, and available in open
formats.

Our Objectives:
1. to encourage governments to make civic data free and available in
open formats
2. to encourage development of citizen projects using civic data

Making civic data freely available to citizens is important because:

*citizen participation in decision-making is fundamental to democracy
*the best decisions are made by informed citizens
*access to civic data is fundamental to keeping citizens informed
*civic data is gathered on behalf of citizens; it should be freely
available for them to use in constructive ways
*citizen projects using civic data will generate innovative solutions to
problems
*this is what a democracy looks like!

The role of this wiki is to complement [WWW] civicaccess-discuss to
create a community of people across Canada who share these beliefs.

Stephane Guidoin wrote:

I agree with both remarks :

- The sentenses on the splash screen could be more precise about our goal.

- The more it goes, the more we use CivicAccess instead of COACID. COACID gives
a clearer definition but usually people don't really notice the signification
of words in such names/acronyms. So we may simply remove COACID and remain with
CivicAccess. Is it necessary to keep an acronym like CAAC ? I don't think. We
could just use CivicAccess + the little motto Hugh sent "It's our data. Let us
use it." (for example)

Stef

Selon Hugh McGuire [hidden email]:

another suggestion:
why not change the name of the organization from:
*Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (COACID)/
Citoyen-ne-s pour l'Accès Libre à l'Information et aux Données Civiques
(CALIDC)

to:
*Civic Access/Accès citoyen (CAAC)

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

"It's our data. Let us use it." - we are allowed to use them already, but only if we pay! 

I agree with both remarks :

- The sentenses on the splash screen could be more precise about our goal.

- The more it goes, the more we use CivicAccess instead of COACID. COACID gives
a clearer definition but usually people don't really notice the signification
of words in such names/acronyms. So we may simply remove COACID and remain with
CivicAccess. Is it necessary to keep an acronym like CAAC ? I don't think. We
could just use CivicAccess + the little motto Hugh sent "It's our data. Let us
use it." (for example)

Stef

Selon Hugh McGuire [hidden email]:

another suggestion:
why not change the name of the organization from:
*Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (COACID)/
Citoyen-ne-s pour l'Accès Libre à l'Information et aux Données Civiques
(CALIDC)

to:
*Civic Access/Accès citoyen (CAAC)

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

I'm glad you put these points here and I think they are all "right" -
but i think the end result is an welcome page that is too long and
overall just too complicated for the average web surfer.

I don't think the points about "re-envisoning society" and "cost
recovery" are absolutely crucial to communicate in the first 10 second
schpeil of what civicaccess is.  They are obviously important points
and they reflect that we have people on board that actually know what
they're talking about in terms of the complexity of these issues, but
I just don't think their being included allows for an easily readable
"welcome" page.

Maybe they belong in the "about" page.  but not in the welcome page - imo.

All the other changes seem good.

On 3/29/06, Tracey P. Lauriault [hidden email] wrote:

 Thanks Hugh;

 Here are my thoughts, forgive the long windedness, to explain the
significance of the choice of some of the terms used in the original 'about'
text.

 Notwithstanding, i think i managed to incorporated a bunch/most of your
proposed text here - http://www.civicaccess.ca/wiki/About

 Why i kept some terms, am attached to others and need help with some:

I found this - http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/1997,
and i have to say that I like seeing the full name even if it long - it is
very descriptive.  I think we can use the long name in this way - Citizens
for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (AccèsCivique/CivicAccess for
short!).

agree.

 if you google CivicAccess all kinds of stuff comes up!
It is important to keep the word  - information - along with the word - data
- , as sometimes data come in nicely & not so nicely packaged formats - web
pages, reports, etc.
Terms such as - freely available & should be free - are problematic since at
the moment data and information are freely available and are free - as in
freedom or foi - but they are not for free, terms such as - at no cost,
gratis, etc.  are more precise.

if we only use the word "no cost" then we don't address whether there
are limitations on how we can use the info/data.  like how
parliamentary copyright was an excuse for the UK gov't to fight
against http://www.theyworkforyou.com .
So I guess both terms are important.  Without restriction + nocost.

Data - are plural.
The geographer in me is obsessed with scale - so when i refer to governments
i use the term levels, to ensure that counties and feds are included - as
sometimes it is harder to get data and information from the smallest unit of
gov or the one closest to you as a citizen (e.g. where are the hazardous
waste sites in my city - cities are reluctant to publish these for insurance
claim issues).
in the rubric of - gov, info highway, economics, life the universe and
everything - it is important to keep the term  - information society -
ironically canada markets itself as such and it is important to push walking
the talk and using terms in the current national discourse taglines
the terms - reliable, accurate, authentic and timely -  are important,
scientists want to work with good quality data not outdated poorly collected
cheap data, currently, there are some scientific data, maps, remote sensing
images, available for free in all the ways we want them to be, but alas,
they are old (e.g. air quality data for 1992 not today!) or are not
accompanied by metadata that explain the fit for use and the quality of the
data.  Also, these terms are important in the world of archives, currently
there is discussion in canada on developing a data archive and there is
ongoing research to incorporate these concepts - see the InterPares Project
- http://interpares.org/ip2/ip2_domain2.cfm
What to do with this sentence? - " Access to civic data is impeded by cost
recovery, IP, poor or unsuitable formatting, a lack of discovery strategies,
security and confidentiality. "  These are the biggies that are keeping data
out of the hands of citizens, if you chat with folks, you will soon find out
that they are mostly unaware of these concepts.  So i want them there
somehow.  Can you help make that work hugh or anyone else?  See what I did.

I don't think they belong on the welcome page.  We're trying to have
an about page that anyone can read and see what we're about.  I think
that sentence definitely belongs somwhere important on the wiki - but
probably not on the welcome page, and only maybe on the "about" page.

Keeping the word taxation is important - as once people realize they have
already paid for the stuff, they get awfully incensed when they have to pay
for them again.  Currently federal departments purchase data from statcan
and provinces - which in effect means we pay for the same data 4 time! a
rather inefficient use of tax dollars!
Over sensitivity to confidentiality - need advice here, i am a firm believer
in confidentiality, however oversensitivity to this concept is problematic,
for example, aggregated health data is not being released, think sars and
avian flu and ebola outbreaks as examples.  i do not want coacid to sound
like we do not support confidentiality but want highlight that institutions
are withholding critical aggregated information & data and using
confidentiality as an excuse.

this doesnt' need to be on the welcome page.  it should be somewhere else.  imo.
we can explain our nuanced view after we get the average person to
easily get a sense of what we're trying to do.

Can you look at the 5th bullet - i would like to include your point a)
innovative solutions and also b) creatively plan - cuz new interesting and
creative proposals are also important!  It is also in the spirit of what was
there - re-visioning which i thought was really nice. Cheers
 Tracey
 ps-can still be tweaked i think.

 Michael Lenczner wrote:
 i think it's great! thanks hugh

On 3/28/06, Hugh McGuire [hidden email] wrote:

 Here is my proposal for the intro text - might as well be on the front
page (?), but it's modified from the "about" on the wiki. For the
landing page, it would need more info. for consideration:
****

Accès Civique/Civic Access (ACCA) believes that government-collected
civic data should be free for citizens to use, and available in open
formats.

Our Objectives:
1. to encourage governments to make civic data free and available in
open formats
2. to encourage development of citizen projects using civic data

Making civic data freely available to citizens is important because:

*citizen participation in decision-making is fundamental to democracy
*the best decisions are made by informed citizens
*access to civic data is fundamental to keeping citizens informed
*civic data is gathered on behalf of citizens; it should be freely
available for them to use in constructive ways
*citizen projects using civic data will generate innovative solutions to
problems
*this is what a democracy looks like!

The role of this wiki is to complement [WWW] civicaccess-discuss to
create a community of people across Canada who share these beliefs.

Stephane Guidoin wrote:

 I agree with both remarks :

- The sentenses on the splash screen could be more precise about our goal.

- The more it goes, the more we use CivicAccess instead of COACID. COACID
gives
a clearer definition but usually people don't really notice the
signification
of words in such names/acronyms. So we may simply remove COACID and remain
with
CivicAccess. Is it necessary to keep an acronym like CAAC ? I don't think.
We
could just use CivicAccess + the little motto Hugh sent "It's our data. Let
us
use it." (for example)

Stef

Selon Hugh McGuire [hidden email]:

 another suggestion:
why not change the name of the organization from:
*Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (COACID)/
Citoyen-ne-s pour l'Accès Libre à l'Information et aux Données Civiques
(CALIDC)

to:
*Civic Access/Accès citoyen (CAAC)

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

 _______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

 _______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

sorry late deadlines today, so comments below might seem a bit blunt, I 
don't mean to be!

   1. I found this - http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/1997, and i
      have to say that I like seeing the full name even if it long - it
      is very descriptive.  I think we can use the long name in this way
      - Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data
      (AccèsCivique/CivicAccess for short!).  if you google CivicAccess
      all kinds of stuff comes up!

I think the name is too long (esp with french/english). no one will 
remember "citizens for open acccess to civic information and data" (I 
can't & I'm a founding member! I can't even remember the acronym is it 
coacid? coaicd?). if you put into google: 
citizens+open+access+civic+information+data you get 5,940,000 results.

civicaccess.ca is easy to remember and is what the project is about. i 
think shorter is better. you don't have to google civicaccess if you can 
remember civicaccess.ca.

   2. It is important to keep the word  - information - along with the
      word - data - , as sometimes data come in nicely & not so nicely
      packaged formats - web pages, reports, etc. 

I'm not sure I understand the distinction. is it that data is ugly & 
info is clean? my understanding of the project is: give us the data & 
we'll make it clean. don,t worry about spending tax money on cleaning it 
(thnat would be nice, but)... we'll clean it if we have to. just give it 
to us. seems to me data does the job - though maybe it,s a scary word 
for some. information is defn easier. not sure on this one.

   3. Terms such as - freely available & should be free - are
      problematic since at the moment data and information are freely
      available and are free - as in freedom or foi - but they are not
      for free, terms such as - at no cost, gratis, etc.  are more
      precise. 

yes. maybe "at no cost" is better.

   4. Data - are plural.

ok.

   5. The geographer in me is obsessed with scale - so when i refer to
      governments i use the term levels, to ensure that counties and
      feds are included - as sometimes it is harder to get data and
      information from the smallest unit of gov or the one closest to
      you as a citizen (e.g. where are the hazardous waste sites in my
      city - cities are reluctant to publish these for insurance claim
      issues).

again, brevity. landing page should be as quick & clear as possible. 
govt levels is an important issue that should be clarified in a bigger 
document, but as a citizen/participant I am agreeing with: governemnt 
should make data available. this should imply municipal, prov, fed. etc.

   6. in the rubric of - gov, info highway, economics, life the universe

      and everything - it is important to keep the term  - information
      society - ironically canada markets itself as such and it is
      important to push walking the talk and using terms in the current
      national discourse taglines

ok. but it's an imprecise & throw-away term, but may help explain what 
we're going on about to average joes. but do people really still use the 
term? I haven't heard it since 1998 ;)

   7. the terms - reliable, accurate, authentic and timely -  are
      important, scientists want to work with good quality data not
      outdated poorly collected cheap data, currently, there are some
      scientific data, maps, remote sensing images, available for free
      in all the ways we want them to be, but alas, they are old (e.g.
      air quality data for 1992 not today!) or are not accompanied by
      metadata that explain the fit for use and the quality of the
      data.  Also, these terms are important in the world of archives,
      currently there is discussion in canada on developing a data
      archive and there is ongoing research to incorporate these
      concepts - see the InterPares Project -
      http://interpares.org/ip2/ip2_domain2.cfm

Once again, this should be clarified in main docs, but I don't think the 
landing page should deal with such important issues. they are secondary 
to a commitment on the part of the govt to provide the data. this should 
imply good data.

   8. What to do with this sentence? - " Access to civic data is impeded
      by cost recovery, IP, poor or unsuitable formatting, a lack of
      discovery strategies, security and confidentiality. "  These are
      the biggies that are keeping data out of the hands of citizens, if
      you chat with folks, you will soon find out that they are mostly
      unaware of these concepts.  So i want them there somehow.  Can you
      help make that work hugh or anyone else?  See what I did.

does not belong in objectives...maybe there needs to be a section: "why 
are we fighting and what are we fighting against." but I would suggest 
that should be elsewhere. thoughts?

   9. Keeping the word taxation is important - as once people realize
      they have already paid for the stuff, they get awfully incensed
      when they have to pay for them again.  Currently federal
      departments purchase data from statcan and provinces - which in
      effect means we pay for the same data 4 time! a rather inefficient
      use of tax dollars!

I think it was in there, but I agree fully. It's our data & we paid for 
it! this to me is the most compelling logical argument. who are you 
(governments) to be charging me for stuff I've paid for. That's a very 
powerful image.

  10. Over sensitivity to confidentiality - need advice here, i am a
      firm believer in confidentiality, however oversensitivity to this
      concept is problematic, for example, aggregated health data is not
      being released, think sars and avian flu and ebola outbreaks as
      examples.  i do not want coacid to sound like we do not support
      confidentiality but want highlight that institutions are
      withholding critical aggregated information & data and using
      confidentiality as an excuse.

yes must be careful here. it's a very important issue on both ends. the 
important point is that we don't want info about individuals.

  11. Can you look at the 5th bullet - i would like to include your
      point a) innovative solutions and also b) creatively plan - cuz
      new interesting and creative proposals are also important!  It is
      also in the spirit of what was there - re-visioning which i
      thought was really nice.

the problem i have with reenvisioning is that it means so many different 
things to different people. why would I (a ottawa beaurocrat, minister, 
or media person) support a big project to reenvision society? what does 
it mean? what,s in it for me? what's in it for the country?

hugh.

Cheers
Tracey
ps-can still be tweaked i think.

Michael Lenczner wrote:

i think it's great!  thanks hugh

On 3/28/06, Hugh McGuire [hidden email] [hidden email] wrote:

Here is my proposal for the intro text - might as well be on the front
page (?), but it's modified from the "about" on the wiki. For the
landing page, it would need more info. for consideration:
****

Accès Civique/Civic Access (ACCA) believes that government-collected
civic data should be free for citizens to use, and available in open
formats.

Our Objectives:
1. to encourage governments to make civic data free and available in
open formats
2. to encourage development of citizen projects using civic data

Making civic data freely available to citizens is important because:

*citizen participation in decision-making is fundamental to democracy
*the best decisions are made by informed citizens
*access to civic data is fundamental to keeping citizens informed
*civic data is gathered on behalf of citizens; it should be freely
available for them to use in constructive ways
*citizen projects using civic data will generate innovative solutions to
problems
*this is what a democracy looks like!

The role of this wiki is to complement [WWW] civicaccess-discuss to
create a community of people across Canada who share these beliefs.

Stephane Guidoin wrote:

I agree with both remarks :

- The sentenses on the splash screen could be more precise about our goal.

- The more it goes, the more we use CivicAccess instead of COACID. COACID gives
a clearer definition but usually people don't really notice the signification
of words in such names/acronyms. So we may simply remove COACID and remain with
CivicAccess. Is it necessary to keep an acronym like CAAC ? I don't think. We
could just use CivicAccess + the little motto Hugh sent "It's our data. Let us
use it." (for example)

Stef

Selon Hugh McGuire [hidden email] [hidden email]:

another suggestion:
why not change the name of the organization from:
*Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (COACID)/
Citoyen-ne-s pour l'Accès Libre à l'Information et aux Données Civiques
(CALIDC)

to:
*Civic Access/Accès citoyen (CAAC)

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

another tweak, mainly: 1st para to:

Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (COACID) 
(AccèsCivique/CivicAccess for short!) believes all levels of government 
should make civic information and data accessible at no cost in open 
formats to their citizens. We believe this is necessary to allow 
citizens to fully participate in the democractic process of an 
"information society."

(that,s just a reverse of the two sentences & some editing). some other 
minor changes, see:
http://www.civicaccess.ca/wiki/About

h.

Tracey P. Lauriault wrote:

  i incorporated the new changes - http://www.civicaccess.ca/wiki/About

see very brief comments below

Hugh McGuire wrote:

sorry late deadlines today, so comments below might seem a bit blunt, I 
don't mean to be!

  1. I found this - http://www.digital-copyright.ca/node/1997, and i
     have to say that I like seeing the full name even if it long - it
     is very descriptive.  I think we can use the long name in this way
     - Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data
     (AccèsCivique/CivicAccess for short!).  if you google CivicAccess
     all kinds of stuff comes up!

I think the name is too long (esp with french/english). no one will 
remember "citizens for open acccess to civic information and data" (I 
can't & I'm a founding member! I can't even remember the acronym is it 
coacid? coaicd?). if you put into google: 
citizens+open+access+civic+information+data you get 5,940,000 results.

civicaccess.ca is easy to remember and is what the project is about. i 
think shorter is better. you don't have to google civicaccess if you can 
remember civicaccess.ca.

see the compromise.

  2. It is important to keep the word  - information - along with the
     word - data - , as sometimes data come in nicely & not so nicely
     packaged formats - web pages, reports, etc. 

I'm not sure I understand the distinction. is it that data is ugly & 
info is clean? my understanding of the project is: give us the data & 
we'll make it clean. don,t worry about spending tax money on cleaning it 
(thnat would be nice, but)... we'll clean it if we have to. just give it 
to us. seems to me data does the job - though maybe it,s a scary word 
for some. information is defn easier. not sure on this one.

data -  is a scarry 4 letter word in some communities so information is 
better.  Originally the including the word data was considered troublesome!

  3. Terms such as - freely available & should be free - are
     problematic since at the moment data and information are freely
     available and are free - as in freedom or foi - but they are not
     for free, terms such as - at no cost, gratis, etc.  are more
     precise. 

yes. maybe "at no cost" is better.

see change

  4. Data - are plural.

ok.

  5. The geographer in me is obsessed with scale - so when i refer to
     governments i use the term levels, to ensure that counties and
     feds are included - as sometimes it is harder to get data and
     information from the smallest unit of gov or the one closest to
     you as a citizen (e.g. where are the hazardous waste sites in my
     city - cities are reluctant to publish these for insurance claim
     issues).

again, brevity. landing page should be as quick & clear as possible. 
govt levels is an important issue that should be clarified in a bigger 
document, but as a citizen/participant I am agreeing with: governemnt 
should make data available. this should imply municipal, prov, fed. etc.

  6. in the rubric of - gov, info highway, economics, life the universe

     and everything - it is important to keep the term  - information
     society - ironically canada markets itself as such and it is
     important to push walking the talk and using terms in the current
     national discourse taglines

ok. but it's an imprecise & throw-away term, but may help explain what 
we're going on about to average joes. but do people really still use the 
term? I haven't heard it since 1998 ;)

oh well!

  7. the terms - reliable, accurate, authentic and timely -  are
     important, scientists want to work with good quality data not
     outdated poorly collected cheap data, currently, there are some
     scientific data, maps, remote sensing images, available for free
     in all the ways we want them to be, but alas, they are old (e.g.
     air quality data for 1992 not today!) or are not accompanied by
     metadata that explain the fit for use and the quality of the
     data.  Also, these terms are important in the world of archives,
     currently there is discussion in canada on developing a data
     archive and there is ongoing research to incorporate these
     concepts - see the InterPares Project -
     http://interpares.org/ip2/ip2_domain2.cfm

Once again, this should be clarified in main docs, but I don't think the 
landing page should deal with such important issues. they are secondary 
to a commitment on the part of the govt to provide the data. this should 
imply good data.

see change

  8. What to do with this sentence? - " Access to civic data is impeded
     by cost recovery, IP, poor or unsuitable formatting, a lack of
     discovery strategies, security and confidentiality. "  These are
     the biggies that are keeping data out of the hands of citizens, if
     you chat with folks, you will soon find out that they are mostly
     unaware of these concepts.  So i want them there somehow.  Can you
     help make that work hugh or anyone else?  See what I did.

does not belong in objectives...maybe there needs to be a section: "why 
are we fighting and what are we fighting against." but I would suggest 
that should be elsewhere. thoughts?

kay - policy page - see mod

  9. Keeping the word taxation is important - as once people realize
     they have already paid for the stuff, they get awfully incensed
     when they have to pay for them again.  Currently federal
     departments purchase data from statcan and provinces - which in
     effect means we pay for the same data 4 time! a rather inefficient
     use of tax dollars!

I think it was in there, but I agree fully. It's our data & we paid for 
it! this to me is the most compelling logical argument. who are you 
(governments) to be charging me for stuff I've paid for. That's a very 
powerful image.

done

 10. Over sensitivity to confidentiality - need advice here, i am a
     firm believer in confidentiality, however oversensitivity to this
     concept is problematic, for example, aggregated health data is not
     being released, think sars and avian flu and ebola outbreaks as
     examples.  i do not want coacid to sound like we do not support
     confidentiality but want highlight that institutions are
     withholding critical aggregated information & data and using
     confidentiality as an excuse.

yes must be careful here. it's a very important issue on both ends. the 
important point is that we don't want info about individuals.

for the policy page

 11. Can you look at the 5th bullet - i would like to include your
     point a) innovative solutions and also b) creatively plan - cuz
     new interesting and creative proposals are also important!  It is
     also in the spirit of what was there - re-visioning which i
     thought was really nice.

the problem i have with reenvisioning is that it means so many different 
things to different people. why would I (a ottawa beaurocrat, minister, 
or media person) support a big project to reenvision society? what does 
it mean? what,s in it for me? what's in it for the country?

see page
cheers
t
ps-good luck with the deadline!

hugh.

Cheers
Tracey
ps-can still be tweaked i think.

Michael Lenczner wrote:

i think it's great!  thanks hugh

On 3/28/06, Hugh McGuire [hidden email] [hidden email] [hidden email] wrote:

Here is my proposal for the intro text - might as well be on the front
page (?), but it's modified from the "about" on the wiki. For the
landing page, it would need more info. for consideration:
****

Accès Civique/Civic Access (ACCA) believes that government-collected
civic data should be free for citizens to use, and available in open
formats.

Our Objectives:
1. to encourage governments to make civic data free and available in
open formats
2. to encourage development of citizen projects using civic data

Making civic data freely available to citizens is important because:

*citizen participation in decision-making is fundamental to democracy
*the best decisions are made by informed citizens
*access to civic data is fundamental to keeping citizens informed
*civic data is gathered on behalf of citizens; it should be freely
available for them to use in constructive ways
*citizen projects using civic data will generate innovative solutions to
problems
*this is what a democracy looks like!

The role of this wiki is to complement [WWW] civicaccess-discuss to
create a community of people across Canada who share these beliefs.

Stephane Guidoin wrote:

I agree with both remarks :

- The sentenses on the splash screen could be more precise about our goal.

- The more it goes, the more we use CivicAccess instead of COACID. COACID gives
a clearer definition but usually people don't really notice the signification
of words in such names/acronyms. So we may simply remove COACID and remain with
CivicAccess. Is it necessary to keep an acronym like CAAC ? I don't think. We
could just use CivicAccess + the little motto Hugh sent "It's our data. Let us
use it." (for example)

Stef

Selon Hugh McGuire [hidden email] [hidden email] [hidden email]:

another suggestion:
why not change the name of the organization from:
*Citizens for Open Access to Civic Information and Data (COACID)/
Citoyen-ne-s pour l'Accès Libre à l'Information et aux Données Civiques
(CALIDC)

to:
*Civic Access/Accès citoyen (CAAC)

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email] [hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca

Splash screen

Splash screen

Re: Splash screen

Re: Splash screen

Re: Name

Re: Splash screen

Re: Name

Re: Name

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: Name

Re: Name

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page

Re: About Text/landing page