Talk:ARRA Broadband Mapping - Revision history

Darkblueb at 05:34, 10 September 2009

2009-09-10T05:34:45Z

Darkblueb at 09:36, 9 September 2009

2009-09-09T09:36:10Z

Darkblueb at 00:22, 9 September 2009

2009-09-09T00:22:20Z

Darkblueb at 23:09, 7 September 2009

2009-09-07T23:09:49Z

Darkblueb at 23:08, 7 September 2009

2009-09-07T23:08:50Z

Darkblueb at 23:08, 7 September 2009

2009-09-07T23:08:03Z

Darkblueb at 23:06, 7 September 2009

2009-09-07T23:06:36Z

Darkblueb at 20:49, 7 September 2009

2009-09-07T20:49:18Z

Darkblueb at 20:40, 7 September 2009

2009-09-07T20:40:58Z

Darkblueb at 19:44, 4 September 2009

2009-09-04T19:44:08Z

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 -----------------
-The ability to map and work interactively on the web with that mapped data is NEW. Paper is not the only output anymore. Live stats are possible. The trajectory is that it is getting more and more capable. "Why map with computers" is an old topic, not worth anything. The new topic is - agile, web accessible and standards-based map data, can be sliced and diced up to fit the needs of a multitude of stakeholders! ajturner's GeoWeb 2.0 talk come to life.. (with that said, a balanced argument is required; an RSS or Twitter feed of changes has "wow", but is a lot less important than data verifiability, an audit trail, security checkpoints, etc. Agility, filling new niches is an OSS strength.. (the Bazaar as opposed to the Cathedral  http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/))
+The ability to map and work interactively on the web with that mapped data is NEW. Paper is not the only output anymore. Live stats are possible. The trajectory is that it is getting more and more capable. "Why map with computers" is an old topic, not worth anything. The new topic is - agile, web accessible and standards-based, geospatially related data, can be sliced and diced up to fit the needs of a multitude of stakeholders!
 Any solution needs to change well over time, and reflect time well in the data. Infrastructure growth doesnt happen over night. This is a long effort. So the ability to see *progress*, revisions, changes over time, are very useful. Both in assessment, and in accountability. Also, as mentioned in the first ramble, any solution must be able to evolve. The deployment criteria calls for an almost unheard of deployment time table. OSS is strong there. [simply state objective/merit, in context bh]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 IMHO there should be two pages.. One is policy, the second simply a technical block diagram of a suggested workflow and network. Bitner, would you be willing to contribute to the block diagram?  "a substantial recommendation on the structure and flow of the data in the repositories"  for ideas, this was a highly successful and modern, multi-stakeholder system  http://www.marinemap.org/marinemap/   http://en.oreilly.com/where2009/public/schedule/detail/7219
-If - there is a substantial participatory mapping project here.. something with SilverStripe CMS, OpenStreetMaps, V0 and V1, etc.. might be called for.. do-able
+If - there is a substantial participatory mapping project here.. something with might be built and hosted... OpenStreetMaps, V0 and V1, etc.. might be called for.. do-able
 ---------------------

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:22, 9 September 2009
Line 16:		Line 16:

	IMHO there should be two pages.. One is policy, the second simply a technical block diagram of a suggested workflow and network. Bitner, would you be willing to contribute to the block diagram? "a substantial recommendation on the structure and flow of the data in the repositories" for ideas, this was a highly successful and modern, multi-stakeholder system http://www.marinemap.org/marinemap/ http://en.oreilly.com/where2009/public/schedule/detail/7219		IMHO there should be two pages.. One is policy, the second simply a technical block diagram of a suggested workflow and network. Bitner, would you be willing to contribute to the block diagram? "a substantial recommendation on the structure and flow of the data in the repositories" for ideas, this was a highly successful and modern, multi-stakeholder system http://www.marinemap.org/marinemap/ http://en.oreilly.com/where2009/public/schedule/detail/7219
		+
		+	If - there is a substantial participatory mapping project here.. something with SilverStripe CMS, OpenStreetMaps, V0 and V1, etc.. might be called for.. do-able

	---------------------		---------------------

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 readily actionable recommendations..
-Our Open Data position boosts economic potential and competitiveness, creates a level playing field in markets, and is a boon to those who are currently underserved; advocates wise allocation of resources, breaks the gridlock of high-speed adoption evident in the US; and serves those in policy that want to see change and results.
+An Open Data position boosts economic potential and competitiveness, creates a level playing field in markets, and is a boon to those who are currently underserved; advocates wise allocation of resources, breaks the gridlock of high-speed adoption evident in the US; and serves those in policy that want to see change and results.
 In numerous cases, private companies have done excellent work in providing real results. While others wring hands, and govt has meetings, companies have laid working structures in place. That has to be respected.

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 -------------
-Publicly verifiable information trumps competitive card-sharking.. e.g. the "sunshine rule."  [loaded language, provocative.. deeply re-approach that concept  bh 07Sep09]
+Publicly verifiable information trumps competitive card-sharking.. e.g. the "sunshine rule."  [loaded language, provocative in a way that is not called for.. deeply re-approach that concept  bh 07Sep09]
 For the best possible result, the plan needs to navigate boldly toward:

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:06, 7 September 2009
Line 47:		Line 47:

	Supply: Third party verifiable		Supply: Third party verifiable
		+
	Demand: fast, user accessible, effective aggregation.		Demand: fast, user accessible, effective aggregation.

@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 What to map ? In the New Zealand example, they mapped both Supply and Demand. Starting from there, things like schools, health care, business vs home start to have a frame around them.  http://broadbandmap.govt.nz/map/
-Getting the broadband providers to reveal their data is a huge political problem, and not yet solved. Every manner of obstacle may be thrown in the tracks of the effort. However, mapping demand side will be a snowball. If there is something to get, every org, school, health facility, constituency, and whatever else will come out of the woodwork to be "on the map."  Both sides have their challenges. WIthout claiming to have all the answers, the paper ought to make an attempt at showing how the challenges of each side can be addressed with an agile, evolving OSS core, and an Open Data policy. Third party verifiable on the one hand, and fast, effective aggregation on the other perhaps.
+Getting the broadband providers to reveal their data is a huge political problem, and not yet solved. [awkward language, insensitive to legitimate concerns on the part of service providers. Not a "red/blue" situation.. bh 07Sep09] Every manner of obstacle may be thrown in the tracks of the effort. [political truth-telling, constructive in this context? the voice of OSGeo ? *no*. ill considered. alternatively win-win framing is possible bh 07Sep09]
 -------------

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:44, 4 September 2009
Line 11:		Line 11:

	[apologies.. after a spate of good writing, some clumsy and ill-considered lines came out. back to more constructive language - 03Sep09 bh]		[apologies.. after a spate of good writing, some clumsy and ill-considered lines came out. back to more constructive language - 03Sep09 bh]
		+	[on further consideration, I am sure that the paper needs to be far more "just state it as it is" and far less "political".. there are political things to say, but OSGeo is not the one to say that.. OSGeo IMHO is in the extreme of technical competancy and merit based software. A position paper ought to be strongly in the same vein -04Sep09 bh]

	----------------------		----------------------