Posted by
Russell McOrmond on
Feb 26, 2013; 8:21pm
URL: http://civicaccess.416.s1.nabble.com/The-case-for-context-in-defining-Open-Data-tp5474p5488.html
On 13-02-26 03:14 PM, James McKinney wrote:
> It's central to the question, "Should we release this data?", but
> it's not central to the question of "Should this data be open data?"
I would go further and suggest that this relates to the question of
"do we need/should we collect this data". As we know, security within
many parts of government is poor and information will end up leaked if
it is stored and not treated with the level of respect required.
Of course, the government could release more privileged mapping data
within letters to first nations apologizing for a previous leak.
That said, I obviously agree with what you and Glen are saying, which
is that the Weenusk issue has nothing to do with Open Data.
--
Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <
http://www.flora.ca/>
Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!
http://l.c11.ca/ict "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
portable media player from my cold dead hands!"
_______________________________________________
CivicAccess-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.pwd.ca/mailman/listinfo/civicaccess-discuss