Posted by
Frank Warmerdam on
Jul 07, 2011; 1:40pm
URL: http://civicaccess.416.s1.nabble.com/Toronto-Sun-Toronto-s-data-open-but-almost-useless-tp3414p3415.html
On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Tracey P. Lauriault <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> However, I am not sure which format the article's author wants the data in,
> xls is probably the lowest common denominator and many of the City's data
> are in those formats. The City of Toronto Catalog has ESRI shape files,
> those are GIS files and there is no making those easier either. How does a
> city decide on formats? Should they be releasing data in the way that they
> use them in the formats used as part of a city's business processes or
> should they re-format the data for the public?
> Geogratis took the approach to release data as they use them. This keeps
> their costs down by not adding any work load, it also keeps the data
> accurate, as conversion can introduce errors in geomatics files. It also
> means that users need to know how to work with those formats and do the
> conversions themselves and bear the risk of errors as well.
> The article is also a bit erroneous, as the Edmonton Catalog has many
> formats that are difficult to use by lay people. Useful for those creating
> mashups but not great for lay people.
> So interesting that it brings up citizen use but not quite an accurate
> picture.
Tracey,
I'm not sure if you are actually asking this audience what formats data
should be released in. In my opinion it is best to release data in close
to the working format within the organization for the reasons you list
- as long as that is at least a reasonably open format. Providing the
data in alternate, more accessable, formats is also nice if there is the
resources to do that but I think is not critical.
Of course, I may think that partly because I provide tools to transform
between formats!
I believe the city of toronto is still using ESRI SDE as it's data repository.
So shapefiles are fairly easy for them to produce and they are fairly
close to the original data model. Shapefiles are also very very widely
supported in proprietary and open source GIS software which makes
it a good choice.
It might be nice if they could actually dump it to "file geodatabase" which
can more accurately represent the relationships, fieldnames and such
of SDE. Unfortunately file geodatabase is substantially less open as a
format though at least there are free tools on some platforms to convert
it into other forms.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam,
[hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows |
http://pobox.com/~warmerdamand watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent