looks good to me. anyone else have editorial suggestions?
On 3/29/06, Tracey P. Lauriault <
> kay - see
>
http://www.civicaccess.ca/wiki/About#preview>
>
> Michael Lenczner wrote:
> 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>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>
>
>