Posted by
Michael Lenczner on
Feb 21, 2006; 11:21pm
URL: http://civicaccess.416.s1.nabble.com/public-announcement-draft-1-tp256p294.html
comments inline below
On 2/21/06, Tracey P. Lauriault <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> Tracey P. Lauriault
> Geomatics and Cartographic Research Centre (GCRC)
> Dept. of Geography, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa (ON) K1S 5B6
> (Off) +1 613 520 2600 ext 2252 (Home) +1 613 234 2805
>
[hidden email] or
[hidden email]
>
> On Feb 20, "Michael Lenczner" <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Here's draft version 0.98 of the public announcement.
> >
> > Unless anyone has problems with it I would suggest that we use it.
> > I'll wait 24 hours for comments/suggestions.
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > We would like to announce the launch of a new online space for
> > Canadian civic engagement - Citizens for Open Access to Civic
> > Information and Data (CivicAccess). CivicAccess is being founded by
> > librarians, civil servants, GIS and IT professionals, academics,
> > lawyers, open-source advocates, and community planners from across
> > Canada. We are motivated by the belief that open civic information
> > and data are necessary tools for being engaged citizens in an
> > "information society".
>
> remove - tools
done.
> >
> > Our goals are:
> >
> > 1) to encourage all levels of government to make civic data freely
> > accessible in open formats and to work with them to help make that
> > happen.
>
> change - freely accessible - to - accessible at no cost for non commercial purposes -
> reason - freely is the current modis operanti but at a cost! excluding freedom of
> information (FOI). non commercial is important as the assumption is that a business can
> afford to do this.
I respectfully disagree with this. I think that I should be able to
make a map of montreal that is advertiser supported and I should be
able to include potholes taken from a municipal or burrough database.
I think that that database should be freely accessible to all - not
just to non-profit entities. Frankly, a lot of projects might not
happen if google adwords are not allowed.
I understand that we might want to aim for "free for non-profits" in
some cases as a temporary measure, but i think the real eventual goal
is "free for anyone to use + redistribute". Especially in this new
world of web-services and GIS where one website or one map will call
information from 10 different databases, I think that it is too
restrictive to have no commercial uses at all.
I wonder if you're thinking mainly of the "data" (typical large data
sets like mapping and census info) as compared to "lighter
information" like real-estate tax records, city council minutes,
restaurant sanitation checks, water and air polution tests, provincial
parlimentary records, etc. Are you saying that this information
should be only free for non-commercial use? Why shouldn't i be able
to collect that info and make it available to my neighbors on an
advertiser supported website?. Because if I'm forced to pay for each
type of information there is no way that I would ever start collecting
it all.
Maybe *big* business can afford to do this, but I think we need to
encourage *little* business (small entrepreneurs) to get involved /
interested in civic information. They are great engines of innovation
and are often more user-centered than projecs by+for geeks. Examples
- I want the local weeklies to have access to this info and to
re-print it. Even the weeklies that *aren't* funded by big companies.
Or Ile Sans Fil (my group). What if we had a business owned by our
non-profit association that charged burroughs $500 a month to operate
a portal for them?
Paying the *big* business prices for commercial licenses of this
information/data is going to keep them out.
But this a valid point that we can debate/discuss. Anyone else have
some opinions on this?
>
> >
> > 2) to support projects that use new online technologies to enable
> > citizens to easily find and share public information and data as well
> > as to re-contextualize that information in ways that make it
> > meaningful to them.
>
> hugh's changes here?
> >
I'm still struggling with the wording of hugh's suggestion. I like
it, but I'm wondering if it's distracting - or I'm worrying if it
sounds too idealistic or smthng?
> > Access to civic information and data help us make informed choices as
> > voters. In addition they help to ensure government transparency and
> > accountability - essential elements of a democracy. In addition these
> > are the bits and bytes required to understand, critically analyze, and
> > re-envision the communities in which we live.
>
> >
> > As engaged citizens of our neighborhoods, cities, and provinces we are
> > working to develop a community of practice around open civic data in
> > Canada.
>
> change - of our - to - in our
> >
I was thinking of citizens not in terms of Canadian citizens but of
the greek city/state citizens of our neighborhood, cities, provinces
*and* then also canadian citizens.
And I don't want to have something in our invitation to participate
where people have to identify as canadian citizens because I'm aware
that many of my co-workers don't identify as canadian citizens - so I
wanted to leave it open for them to feel implicated.
but if the way it's written sounds dumb, i would rather fix it then
leave it sounding ugly just as a symbol. let me know.
> > This is an idea whose time has come. Please join us in making it a reality!
> >
> > signed:
> >
> > Names
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/13/06, Stephane Guidoin <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Basically, yup. Hopefully we can get some of the biggies to blog it,
> > > > too. If someone wants to send it as a press release that would
> > > > probably be okay as well - I'm not a PR guy so I don't know if there's
> > > > any reason to try that.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone else have ideas?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > To me there's a difference between invitation and press release. Actual
> > > participants could send invitations to people they know. But it could
> > > be interesting to make a press release which is more an announcement
> > > than an invitation.
> > >
> > > For example Online Rights Canada made a press release (I copied it there
> > > after as a reminder). But obviously, we don't have the same target as
> > > ORC : we want people to be participants and not spectators.
> > >
> > > The text Mike sent might not have the right tone to be added on a
> > > website. But it's good when you make a invitation to someone you know.
> > > To me, only the first sentence really needs to be changed to make
> > > something more public and opened.
> > >
> > > Stef
> > <snip>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
> >
[hidden email]
> > <a
> href='
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca'>
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca</a>
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
>
[hidden email]
>
http://civicaccess.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss_civicaccess.ca>