Top 10 Data

[Greg McMullin Sr.]

All,
   Just a thought with regard to any location data. A key requirement
in using location data is the ability to accurately locate the
"things" on a map and to do this accurately you need a map that
includes property parcel polygons and an identifying number for each.
    My experience suggests that this information is available but to
access it from municipalities is often difficult.
    If it isn't to late I suggest that along with any request for open
data relating to the location of things, that a note be added that
also requests the property parcel data as well.

Greg

> On May 16, 2014, at 2:15 PM, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Send CivicAccess-discuss mailing list submissions to
>    [hidden email]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    [hidden email]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    [hidden email]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CivicAccess-discuss digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Top 10 Municipal Datasets (James McKinney)
>   2. Re: Top 10 Municipal Datasets (Jury Konga)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 13:26:24 -0400
> From: James McKinney <[hidden email]>
> To: civicaccess discuss <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Top 10 Municipal Datasets
> Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Awesome! And now to share the list with open data municipalities, so that we get more datasets released from this list, and fewer datasets like helicopter landing sites. Nelson mentioned sharing with MISA, for instance.
>
> I don?t know if the list will change every year, but I think it would be worthwhile to repeat next year, based on what we?ve learned. For example, as Linda wrote, we can work with open data municipalities to do better promotion. And as Heather wrote, we should think of ways to get the survey to people outside of open data. We can also make it bilingual. I?m sure we can continue to improve the list of survey options; my only comment at this point is to split up ?locations of things? to be more specific.
>
> Following up on another of Heather?s comments, if we can get municipalities to release "Top Searches on Government Websites? as a dataset, that would help inform the list of wanted datasets as well.
>
> Thanks, Herb, and everyone who helped make this first top 10 list!
>
> James
>
>
>> On May 14, 2014, at 11:13 PM, Herb Lainchbury <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello All,
>>
>> Thanks to everyone who helped out, voted, shared, discussed and otherwise furthered this project.  Much appreciated.  James, thanks for removing the duplicates.  I suggest we consider it complete at this point.
>>
>> Canadian Open Data Community Top Ten Wanted Municipal Datasets - May 2014
>> Rezoning permit applications
>> Land use changes
>> Financial data (revenue, expenses, liabilities, equity, etc..)
>> Locations of things (fire hydrants, drinking water fountains, public toilets, bike parking, ...)
>> Transit data
>> Development permit applications
>> Crime information
>> Road construction (511 data)
>> Political financing
>> Real time traffic flow data and daily road usage patterns
>> With #1 being the most desired.
>>
>> Tracey, could we please post this on datalibre so we can all refer to it there and let our various networks know about it?
>>
>> Thank you!
>> Herb
>>
>> ps: I also suggest we review it on a regular basis, perhaps yearly to start?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Herb Lainchbury <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I think your edits are right on the mark James.   Thanks for doing that.
>>
>> Does anyone else have any feedback or suggestions on this before we consider it done?
>>
>> Keep in mind, this is our first attempt.  I expect we will do this once per year at a minimum - so we will have more opportunities to refine it.
>>
>> Herb
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 5:56 PM, James McKinney <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> These are very useful results!
>>
>> I knew from other studies that planning & development was of great interest, but this shows which datasets are prioritized within that theme: i.e. zoning data (1,2) is more in-demand than development applications (6,11). Sunlight has a series on zoning data:
>>
>> https://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/municipal_zoning/
>> https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/05/23/the-landscape-of-municipal-zoning-data/
>> https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/05/the-impact-of-opening-up-zoning-data/
>> https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/07/recommendations-for-stronger-zoning-data/
>>
>> They also dove into Asset Disclosure, Campaign Finance (12), Crime (8) and Lobbying:
>>
>> https://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/local/
>>
>> It?s interesting to see that health inspections (16) and building citations (19) are as low as they are. Health inspections are published by several cities in Canada, and both datasets have seen standardizations efforts by Code for America. However, this result is in keeping with the results of similar studies, like Monmouth which I had shared previously.
>>
>> I?m not sure that there is a clear distinction between "development permit applications" and "development applications?. The wording of ?Financial data (revenue, expenses?)? seems to overlap with ?Financial - actual expenditures?. If we merge those and also ?transit data?, we get:
>>
>> Rezoning permit applications
>> Land use changes
>> Financial data (revenue, expenses, liabilities, equity, etc..)
>> Locations of things (fire hydrants, drinking water fountains, public toilets, bike parking, ...)
>> Transit data
>> Development permit applications
>> Crime information
>> Road construction (511 data)
>> Political financing
>> Real time traffic flow data and daily road usage patterns
>> Great work!
>>
>> James
>>
>>> On May 1, 2014, at 12:35 PM, Herb Lainchbury <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey All,
>>>
>>> The results from the top 10 datasets survey are in.   You can find them here: https://www.surveymonkey.net/results/SM-7Y5RDST/
>>>
>>> I have to apologize, somehow Transit got in there twice.  It's clearly in the top ten in both cases so I think it's safe to say it's in the top ten.
>>>
>>> We intentionally left the overlapping items and so we also see a few entries near the top around "Development Permits", "Land Use Changes", and "Rezoning Permits".
>>>
>>> Most of the entries are fairly distinct but there are a few that seem to me to be a bit overlapping.  So, we could either take the top 10 with the most votes (combining the two "Transit data" entries into one) - or we could attempt to eliminate any redundancy so we have 10 fairly distinct entries.  I am open to suggestions.
>>>
>>> Here are the top 20 for your reference which should be enough to get us down to 10.  Please look at the link above for the actual numbers.
>>> Rezoning permit applications
>>> Land use changes
>>> Financial data (revenue, expenses, liabilities, equity, etc..)
>>> Locations of things (fire hydrants, drinking water fountains, public toilets, bike parking, ...)
>>> Transit data
>>> Development permit applications
>>> Financial - actual expenditures
>>> Crime information
>>> Road construction (511 data)
>>> Transit data
>>> Development applications
>>> Political financing
>>> Real time traffic flow data and daily road usage patterns
>>> Contracts
>>> Property assessments
>>> Health inspections (e.g. Yelp's LIVES specification http://www.yelp.ca/healthscores)
>>> Public consultations
>>> Salaries
>>> Building citations (problems with structures etc...)
>>> Minutes of meetings
>>> Cheers,
>>> Herb
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>>> 250.704.6154
>>> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>> 250.704.6154
>> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>> 250.704.6154
>> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20140516/4f9a00e3/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 14:15:30 -0400
> From: Jury Konga <[hidden email]>
> To: "'civicaccess discuss'" <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Top 10 Municipal Datasets
> Message-ID: <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> Agreed this is a great start and something to build on over time.
> Yesterday, at the GO Open Data Conference in Toronto #GOOD14,  I announced
> that the Open Knowledge Foundation - Canada will be ramping up to launch a
> Canadian Local Open Data Census this summer.  The OKF local version template
> began in February with a number of countries participating - here's the U.S.
> version  http://us-city.census.okfn.org/    Here's the initial blog post by
> Rufus Pollock
> http://blog.okfn.org/2014/02/04/announcing-the-local-open-data-census/
>
>
>
> I've talked to Herb and a few others about this project and looking for
> others that might be interested in assisting.  See some similarities in the
> Top 10 and the OKF list - there is some latitude in changing data sets used
> in the census although the idea with standardizing the data sets is to allow
> comparisons not only within our country but also with other countries local
> data.
>
>
>
> Let me know if you're interested.
>
>
>
> Cheers  Jury Konga
>
>
>
> OKF Canada Ambassador
>
>
>
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of James
> McKinney
> Sent: May-16-14 1:26 PM
> To: civicaccess discuss
> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss] Top 10 Municipal Datasets
>
>
>
> Awesome! And now to share the list with open data municipalities, so that we
> get more datasets released from this list, and fewer datasets like
> helicopter landing sites. Nelson mentioned sharing with MISA, for instance.
>
>
>
> I don't know if the list will change every year, but I think it would be
> worthwhile to repeat next year, based on what we've learned. For example, as
> Linda wrote, we can work with open data municipalities to do better
> promotion. And as Heather wrote, we should think of ways to get the survey
> to people outside of open data. We can also make it bilingual. I'm sure we
> can continue to improve the list of survey options; my only comment at this
> point is to split up "locations of things" to be more specific.
>
>
>
> Following up on another of Heather's comments, if we can get municipalities
> to release "Top Searches on Government Websites" as a dataset, that would
> help inform the list of wanted datasets as well.
>
>
>
> Thanks, Herb, and everyone who helped make this first top 10 list!
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
>
>
> On May 14, 2014, at 11:13 PM, Herb Lainchbury <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> Thanks to everyone who helped out, voted, shared, discussed and otherwise
> furthered this project.  Much appreciated.  James, thanks for removing the
> duplicates.  I suggest we consider it complete at this point.
>
>
>
> Canadian Open Data Community Top Ten Wanted Municipal Datasets - May 2014
>
> 1.    Rezoning permit applications
> 2.    Land use changes
> 3.    Financial data (revenue, expenses, liabilities, equity, etc..)
> 4.    Locations of things (fire hydrants, drinking water fountains, public
> toilets, bike parking, ...)
> 5.    Transit data
> 6.    Development permit applications
> 7.    Crime information
> 8.    Road construction (511 data)
> 9.    Political financing
> 10.    Real time traffic flow data and daily road usage patterns
>
> With #1 being the most desired.
>
>
>
> Tracey, could we please post this on datalibre so we can all refer to it
> there and let our various networks know about it?
>
>
>
> Thank you!
>
> Herb
>
>
>
> ps: I also suggest we review it on a regular basis, perhaps yearly to start?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Herb Lainchbury <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> I think your edits are right on the mark James.   Thanks for doing that.
>
>
>
> Does anyone else have any feedback or suggestions on this before we consider
> it done?
>
>
>
> Keep in mind, this is our first attempt.  I expect we will do this once per
> year at a minimum - so we will have more opportunities to refine it.
>
>
>
> Herb
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 5:56 PM, James McKinney <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> These are very useful results!
>
>
>
> I knew from other studies that planning & development was of great interest,
> but this shows which datasets are prioritized within that theme: i.e. zoning
> data (1,2) is more in-demand than development applications (6,11). Sunlight
> has a series on zoning data:
>
>
>
> https://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/municipal_zoning/
>
> https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/05/23/the-landscape-of-municipal-zo
> ning-data/
>
> https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/05/the-impact-of-opening-up-zoni
> ng-data/
>
> https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/07/recommendations-for-stronger-
> zoning-data/
>
>
>
> They also dove into Asset Disclosure, Campaign Finance (12), Crime (8) and
> Lobbying:
>
>
>
> https://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/local/
>
>
>
> It's interesting to see that health inspections (16) and building citations
> (19) are as low as they are. Health inspections are published by several
> cities in Canada, and both datasets have seen standardizations efforts by
> Code for America. However, this result is in keeping with the results of
> similar studies, like Monmouth which I had shared previously.
>
>
>
> I'm not sure that there is a clear distinction between "development permit
> applications" and "development applications". The wording of "Financial data
> (revenue, expenses.)" seems to overlap with "Financial - actual
> expenditures". If we merge those and also "transit data", we get:
>
>
>
> 1.    Rezoning permit applications
> 2.    Land use changes
> 3.    Financial data (revenue, expenses, liabilities, equity, etc..)
> 4.    Locations of things (fire hydrants, drinking water fountains, public
> toilets, bike parking, ...)
> 5.    Transit data
> 6.    Development permit applications
>
> 7.    Crime information
> 8.    Road construction (511 data)
>
> 9.    Political financing
> 10.    Real time traffic flow data and daily road usage patterns
>
> Great work!
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On May 1, 2014, at 12:35 PM, Herb Lainchbury <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hey All,
>
>
>
> The results from the top 10 datasets survey are in.   You can find them
> here: https://www.surveymonkey.net/results/SM-7Y5RDST/
>
>
>
> I have to apologize, somehow Transit got in there twice.  It's clearly in
> the top ten in both cases so I think it's safe to say it's in the top ten.
>
>
>
> We intentionally left the overlapping items and so we also see a few entries
> near the top around "Development Permits", "Land Use Changes", and "Rezoning
> Permits".
>
>
>
> Most of the entries are fairly distinct but there are a few that seem to me
> to be a bit overlapping.  So, we could either take the top 10 with the most
> votes (combining the two "Transit data" entries into one) - or we could
> attempt to eliminate any redundancy so we have 10 fairly distinct entries.
> I am open to suggestions.
>
>
>
> Here are the top 20 for your reference which should be enough to get us down
> to 10.  Please look at the link above for the actual numbers.
>
> 1.    Rezoning permit applications
> 2.    Land use changes
> 3.    Financial data (revenue, expenses, liabilities, equity, etc..)
> 4.    Locations of things (fire hydrants, drinking water fountains, public
> toilets, bike parking, ...)
> 5.    Transit data
> 6.    Development permit applications
> 7.    Financial - actual expenditures
> 8.    Crime information
> 9.    Road construction (511 data)
> 10.    Transit data
> 11.    Development applications
> 12.    Political financing
> 13.    Real time traffic flow data and daily road usage patterns
> 14.    Contracts
> 15.    Property assessments
> 16.    Health inspections (e.g. Yelp's LIVES specification
> http://www.yelp.ca/healthscores)
> 17.    Public consultations
> 18.    Salaries
> 19.    Building citations (problems with structures etc...)
> 20.    Minutes of meetings
>
> Cheers,
>
> Herb
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>
> 250.704.6154
>
> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com <http://www.dynamic-solutions.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>
> 250.704.6154
>
> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com <http://www.dynamic-solutions.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Herb Lainchbury, Dynamic Solutions
>
> 250.704.6154
>
> http://www.dynamic-solutions.com <http://www.dynamic-solutions.com/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.pwd.ca/pipermail/civicaccess-discuss/attachments/20140516/1ab85fbc/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss
>
> End of CivicAccess-discuss Digest, Vol 81, Issue 18
> ***************************************************

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