Talk:ARRA Broadband Mapping
I think that most of these paragraphs are better as about one sentance each.. I think we should get back to an outline or sketch phase and reprioritize what goes in [01Sep09 12:00 PST][bh]
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"
Some Policy points:
- vendor interop / open standards
- committed to transparency
- acheivable with proven means
Misc Notes:
The rise of Open Source Software is virtually synonymous with the building of the Internet - common, standards based infrastructure. The success of OSS is no more strikingly embodied than in Apache - in the midst of great uncertainty and a fierce turf war over the control of the Web Server, the critical component of the new "WWW", Apache, warts and all, built on open standards and in open source, rose to became the vendor neutral infrastructure upon which rapid, reliable progress was made. The Open Web is a strength with the right tools to search and navigate it.. In much the same way, an Open Data infrastructure provides the vendor neutral framework upon which both commercial and public-good progress is made.
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/))
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. Previous vendor solutions are top heavy and cumbersome. 1 year => .1 release cycle...
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, 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.
Publicly verifiable information trumps competitive card-sharking.. e.g. the "sunshine rule." There are powerful interests that want to take the most profitable markets and exclude the rest; to hoard infrastructure; to spin and delay while reaping advantage.. This Open Data position is an advantage to those on the flip side of that equation, AND to those in policy that want to see fast change.
On the other hand, 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. Why mention this? Because this paper is presented to a sophisticated audience, that knows both sides of the arguments already!! By realizing the STRENGTHS of the OSGeo position, you dont have to blather on about basics.
What does OSGeo bring UNIQUELY ? What can OSGeo say out loud that others can't say ?
In this paper, there is an informational component - as in, hey , this exists.. and there is a, hmm, deeper situational component, as in, push the apple cart the way it wants to go, due to forces larger than OSGeo and the wind and the lay of the land, politically, economically. OSGeo has to tap into that to really make an impact here.
This is a chance to speak and that chance to speak is IMPORTANT. Dont waste your words
from the Webinar "Broadband penetration has stagnated" "Broadband is essential to compete in the world economy" also urban and rural problems are vastly different, and both matter. "Inefficiency has plagued the process.. we can no longer afford that"
For the accountants and bankers.. money talks.. What is the Cost/Benefit proposition here? The centerpiece of the solution is OSS software that is proven, and costs less for the taxpayer. $100k plus for Oracle spatial rack? ESRI Licenses ? These products are not the center, they are branches; valued, proven, and branches. The core infrastructure is Linux and OSS, for provable reasons, and with provable cost benefit.