Posted by
Michael Lenczner on
Mar 29, 2006; 6:53pm
URL: http://civicaccess.416.s1.nabble.com/Splash-screen-tp405p420.html
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>
>
>