http://civicaccess.416.s1.nabble.com/Toronto-Sun-Toronto-s-data-open-but-almost-useless-tp3414p3426.html
Totally agree that dev's won't fix _all_ world problems. What I'm hoping to
through others to address things like making data more useful. I'm with you
focusing investments into RHoK type events, hackathons, etc. to drive more
debate that the Sun article did not describe clearly. I agree on all
them to fix discrimination, poverty, and other divides. We have a long
way. I think government will always have to supplement the work of
> James,
>
> While I agree with you that we're disagreeing on terms, it's also
> important
> to point out that it's not really "Public vs Open" data discussion. You
> probably read Melanie Chernoff's article on the differences
> (
http://opensource.com/government/10/12/what-%E2%80%9Copen-data%E2%80%9D-means-%E2%80%93-and-what-it-doesn%E2%80%99t),
> but in the context of this discussion: data is data, it's just 'raw facts'
> in a specific file or feed format. So, if the article was a piece on
> pros/cons of a certain file format, and whether citizens are more
> confortable with one vs. the other, it's a whole different story.
>
> What the article perhaps MEANT to say, and what you're really talking
> about
> is the need for Information vs. just Data. I couldn't agree more on the
> need
> for processing of the data, served up to citizens in a citizen-ready form.
> What I disagree with is saying that Toronto's approach to open data was a
> "problem", particularly vs. other cities, resulting in _data_ that was
> useless. It's not about the data, and the article is really discussing the
> need for more information. There are many ways to help make _data_ more
> useful by processing it into information that non-tech savvy citizens will
> find "useful". Making information more available is an important step, but
> hardly an indication of the _data_ being useless.
>
> Lastly, you state it's not enough to rely on developers, and that
> "developers do not have hearts of gold". I beg to differ. Many develop &
> participate in communities like FOSS because they are motivated by the
> process of learning, creating something for others & making our society
> better. There's absolutely a wealth of resources, skills & interest that
> exists within these communities, and Governments need to learn how engage
> and participate within these communities. That's when they can rely less
> on
> our taxpayer's dollars to get information out citizens, and more on
> communities who are eager to get their hands on ANY data -- to make it
> into
> useful information.
>
> Nik Garkusha @Nik_G
>
http://openhalton.ca>
http://port25.ca>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: James McKinney
> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 12:54 PM
> To: civicaccess discuss
> Subject: Re: [CivicAccess-discuss]Toronto Sun: Toronto’s data open but
> almost useless
>
> Nik, the argument is not fallacious. You are just disagreeing on
> terms. I agree with your definition of open data. What the Sun is
> asking for is public data, not open data. In brief, public data is
> open data that is citizen-ready. That means ready for all citizens,
> not just those with tech savvy. "Pure" open data is only
> technically-savvy-citizen-ready. You write that it is not the
> government's responsibility to provide public data, only open data.
> The Sun's argument is that the government _ought_ to provide public
> data, not just open data; that it ought to serve all citizens, not
> just the tech-savvy. Much of this data is relevant to everyone,
> therefore everyone ought to be able to use it (so the argument runs).
>
> You write that there's nothing wrong with relying on developers to
> build open-data-based apps for the public, and back it up by saying
> that the public already relies on developers to build all sorts of
> apps. Let's have a look at these other apps. Do they target, engage
> and empower the marginalized, the underprivileged, the poor? No; it's
> not a hot, profitable, or easy market. But what about government?
> Should it also ignore these people? Of course not. That's why it's not
> enough to rely on developers. Developers do not have hearts of gold.
> This is the argument the Sun is making.
>
> I find nothing objectionable with the Sun article. All it's saying is,
> "open data is good, but public data is better; don't forget public
> data in your open data push."
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Nik G <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> The fallacy of this article's argument is that data isn't "truly open"
>> until
>> the Government builds or implements interfaces, applications & tools to
>> make
>> the data more accessible to non-technical audiences. The whole point of
>> open
>> data is to enable Government as a Platform for others to build upon,
>> where
>> the Government does the least possible to get the data out into the open,
>> so
>> that _others_, not Government, can then build visualizations,
>> applications,
>> mashups, etc.
>>
>> The key to getting more citizen-ready applications & visualizations is
>> fostering community development, working in tandem with the local open
>> data
>> & open gov advocates to scale through others. There's nothing wrong with
>> citizens relying on web-savvy developers to build apps, that's how it's
>> done
>> for thousands of "non-opendata" apps that we use every day on the web,
>> mobile, desktop. The point is that our governments need to build
>> competencies in harnessing the skills & knowledge of communities to take
>> that open data from raw form to a citizen-ready app.
>>
>> City of Toronto has a great strategy in pushing to make open data as part
>> of
>> each department's workflow; it's visionary in that this is a cultural
>> shift
>> and not a point-in-time activity. But as with any initiative that's
>> pushing
>> the cultural, process & technology boundaries, there are cost/benefit and
>> immediacy/relevancy trade-offs. In case of open data, as long as the data
>> is
>> as close to the source, original dataset, there's nothing wrong in
>> getting
>> it out in a machine-readable format under an open license sooner rather
>> than
>> later. By the way, Toronto's catalogue file formats aren't that
>> drastically
>> different from any other catalogue, providing your usual CSV, XML, XLS
>> formats that are "spreadsheet-ready". If it's the geographic formats that
>> _seems_ to be "user unfriendly" (ESRI Shapefile vs. the commonly-used
>> KML),
>> there are also relatively simple ways to convert those GIS formats
>> without
>> having to sacrifice staying close to the original data formats used by
>> the
>> city.
>>
>> Open, Rinse, Repeat is the recipe for success, not Wait Till it's Perfect
>> &
>> Pretty, but Outdated.
>>
>> I'll take open data SOONER rather than later, ANY format rather than no
>> format, and NOT having to wait months or years till it's "perfect", but
>> meets everyone's requirements according to everyone's technical comfort
>> level.
>>
>> Nik Garkusha @Nik_G
>>
http://openhalton.ca>>
http://port25.ca>>
>> From: Tracey P. Lauriault
>> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 9:22 AM
>> To: civicaccess discuss
>> Subject: [CivicAccess-discuss] Toronto Sun: Toronto’s data open but
>> almost
>> useless
>>
>> Toronto’s data open but almost useless
>>
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/07/06/torontos-data-open-but-almost-useless>>
>> This is the first news article I have seen in Canada to date that
>> questions
>> data access for citizens not just designer/developer/academic community:
>>
>>> “Right now, the primary audience is the local
>>> designer/developer/academic
>>> community,” Garner says. “However, we have plans to build it out and
>>> position it more clearly within the context of Open Government in a way
>>> which would have more tangible benefits for a wider audience.”
>>> It’s time for those plans to become action. As long as citizens have to
>>> rely on web-savvy developers to do the hard work for them, the data isn’t
>>> truly open.
>>
>>
>> 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 P. Lauriault
>> 613-234-2805
>>
http://traceyplauriault.ca/>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>