250 likes | 424 Views
W3C Electronic Government Interest Group Overview. Kevin Novak, Chair W3C Electronic Government Interest Group July, 2009. Electronic Government Interest Group. Formed/Chartered in June of 2008 Participation open to W3C members and Invited Experts
E N D
W3C Electronic Government Interest Group Overview Kevin Novak, Chair W3C Electronic Government Interest Group July, 2009
Electronic Government Interest Group • Formed/Chartered in June of 2008 • Participation open to W3C members and Invited Experts • Public and others can join the email list to watch and learn about activities and discussions • Promoting openness and contribution across diverse bodies and interests
Overview of 1st Year Charter • Three Areas of Focus: • Usage of Web Standards (Government Websites and use of best practices and standards) • Transparency and Participation (Enabling discovery, communications, and interaction) • Seamless Integration of Data (Use of data standards, Semantic Web, XML)
Overview of Year 1 Charter • Intent to demonstrate complexity of electronic government: • Cultural • Legal/Policy • Change • Technical and Technologies • Available Standards and Best Practices
Year 1 Work Items • Collaborating and partnering with governments and other organizations (The World Bank, EC, OECD, OAS, ICA, CEN, OASIS). • Identifying, validating, and documenting existing applicable use cases/standards. • Identifying gaps in the open standards that currently exist.
Year 1 Work Items • Working collaboratively on having open standards developed, validated, and tested. • Creating, evaluating, and testing use cases. • Compiling and communicating issues paper (called Group Notes). • Creating the outline and work plan for year 2 of the eGovernment activities at W3C.
Developed/explored Use Cases • Semantic Interoperability (eg. Judicial) • Persistent URIs • Performance Data + Citizen Choice • Data Sharing Policy Expression • Digital Preservation + Authenticity + Temporal Degradation • IPR Expression • Identification + Authentication • Data Aggregation • Your Web Site is your API (eg. RDFa, sitemaps?) • What Data? How does the government decide? • Participation in Social Media; what are the rules ? • Temporal DataLegislation/Legal (Law Reports) Geospatial • Multi channel delivery (back/front)
Changes and Themes • Web 2.0 • New Open Government and Open Government Data Movement • Explosion of Social Media and Networking Options • Clearer understanding and support of the Semantic Web
Issues Paper (group note) Published • Issue Paper published May 12, 2009 • Includes extensive discovery and documenting of electronic government space • Government challenges • Perceptions • Trends and Modalities of the web impacting electronic government
Trends and Modalities of the Web • Trends: • Global • Connected • On the Go • Accessible • Readily Available
Trends and Modalities of the Web • Modalities: • Provide • Engage • Enable
Issue Paper • Focus Areas: • Participation and Citizen Engagement • Open Government Data • Interoperability • Multi-channel delivery • Identification and Authentication • Long term data management
Participation and Engagement • Participation: • Social Networking Tools • Change in Publishing Modality (everyone is publisher) • Engagement: • Policy related government to citizen interaction • Policy related engagement to citizen conversations • Advice related to government citizen or business interaction • Advice related to citizen to citizen interaction
Open Government Data • Summarize the opportunities • Note Challenges • Definitions of OGD • Available Web Standards and Best Practices
Interoperability • Focus is in W3C Electronic Government terms: • Ability for government agencies to share and exchange information • Ability for different levels of government to share and exchange information • Ability to share, make available, and exchange information with organizations and individuals
Multi-Channel Delivery • Identification of Channels • Decision to focus on Mobile Web (given demand and explosion of mobile device usage in developing countries) • Documented challenges, existing web standards • Integrated work of W3C Mobile Work Group
Identification and Authentication • Demonstration of the variety of issues, challenges, and differing perceptions of identification and authentication. • Recognition that significant policy and legislative work and definition needs to occur prior to more technical work and exploration. • Many other challenges are currently on government’s agendas which need to be addressed.
Long Term Data Management • Deferred for later work and focus
Year 2 Draft Charter • Results and Strategy Based • Clearly defined focus and approaches • Continue to build out and address all areas of document however most efforts to focus on: • Open Government Data/linked data • Web Education and Outreach (web interface, accessibility, etc.) • Move to issue topical and directed issue papers • Closer integration and collaboration with other W3C groups • Possibility on having community with W3C support develop prototypes.
Open Gov Data and Linked Data • Memo coming from EGOV group in late August building on Berners Lee memo • Tim Berners Lee Published input on Linked Data: • http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/GovData.html • UK Govt adopting Open Linked Data principles (Tim Berners Lee made their advisor/champion) • John Sheridan, eGov Co-Chair blazing trails with UK Govt data: • http://services.data.gov.uk/sparql • http://transport.data.gov.uk/0/id/road/M5
W3C Technical Summary • Summary of W3C Resources for EGOV Community: • http://www.w3.org/2009/03/25-TechSurvey/
Next Steps • W3C Electronic Government Group will: • Continue to work with W3C groups and others standards bodies to address current and needed open standards. • Focus on further maturing and developing issues and solutions identified in the egov draft issues paper. • Vet, validate existing use cases and identify or develop new use cases that provide realistic and successful examples of interoperability. • Listen to the community (government and stakeholders) on what is needed and attempt to match need with relative standards and practices.