[od-discuss] A harmonised Open Format definition

Tue Apr 21 21:36:45 UTC 2015

Hi Stephen,

I agree.

Cheers

b

________________
*Baden M Appleyard*
National Programme Director
Australian Governments' Open Access and Licensing Programme (AusGOAL)
Mobile: +61(0)459 824 061
Linkedin: http://au.linkedin.com/in/badenappleyard

AusGOAL
Visit our Website <http://www.ausgoal.gov.au> | Like and Share us on
Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/AusGOAL> | Join our LinkedIn Group
<http://linkd.in/oq5L3u> | Follow Us on Twitter: @AusGOAL
<https://twitter.com/#!/AusGOAL> | +1 on Google Plus
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/108169778015177255341/108169778015177255341/posts/p/pub>
*New:*  *AusGOAL is now the Creative Commons Affiliate in Australia for
Publicly Funded Information.*

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Stephen Gates <stephen.gates at me.com>
wrote:

> Hello Open Knowledge and Open Data Institute friends,
>
> I would like to explore the possibility of aligning the Open Definition
> <http://opendefinition.org/od/>, Open Data Census <http://census.okfn.org>
>  and Open Data Certificates <https://certificates.theodi.org> definitions
> for Open Format. This would enable the Census, Certificate and other open
> data tools to refer to the Open Definition for a definition of Open Format,
> in the same way they currently do for Open Licences.
>
> To extend this concept further, I would like to mirror the Conformant
> Licenses <http://opendefinition.org/licenses/> page in the Open
> Definition with a Conformant Formats page. This would provide a list of
> file formats that conform with the Open Format definition. New formats
> could be submitted for assessment. Common formats (e.g. XML, JSON, KML,
> CSV, etc.) would be seeded on the page. Similar to the non-conformant
> licences <http://opendefinition.org/licenses/nonconformant/>  partially
> conforming formats could also be captured (e.g. XLS, SHP). This would cater
> for the spectrum of open file formats proposed by Tim Burners-Lee in his 5
> star scheme <http://5stardata.info>.
>
>
> The respective definitions or help text are:
>
> *Open Definition* draft 2.1
>
> https://github.com/okfn/opendefinition/blob/master/source/open-definition-2.1-dev.markdown
>
>
> The *work* *must* be machine-readable and provided in an open format. An
> open format is one which places no restrictions, monetary or otherwise,
> upon its use and can be fully processed with at least one
> free/libre/open-source software tool. Data *should* be provided in bulk
> where possible.
>
>
> *Open Data Census*
>
> see format, machine readable and bulk rows in Google Sheet,
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqR8dXc6Ji4JdFI0QkpGUEZyS0wxYWtLdG1nTk9zU3c&usp=drive_web#gid=0
> *Format*:
> This question describes the form that the data is available in. For
> example, for tabular data it might be: Excel, CSV, HTML or even PDF. For
> geodata it might be shapefiles, geojson or something else. If available in
> multiple formats, the format descriptors are listed separated with commas.
> Any further information is put in the comments section.
>
> *Machine Readable*:
> Files are digital, yes, but not all can be processed or parsed easily by a
> computer. In order to answer this question, you would need to look at the
> datasets file type.
>
> As a rule of thumb the following file types are machine readable:
>
> - XLS
> - CSV
> - JSON
> - XML
>
> If the files are in the following formats, the are NOT machine readable:
>
> - HTML
> - PDF
> - DOC
> - GIF
> - JPEG
> - PPT
>
> If you have a different file type and you don’t know if it’s machine
> readable or not, send an email to the Open Data Census list.
>
> *Bulk*:
> Data is available in bulk if the whole dataset can be downloaded easily.
> It is considered non-bulk if the citizens are limited to getting parts of
> the dataset through an online interface.
>
> For example, if restricted to querying a web form and retrieving a few
> results at a time from a very large database.
>
>
> *Open Data Certificates*
>
> Question: Is this data in a standard open format?
> Help Text: Open standards are created through a fair, transparent and
> collaborative process. Anyone can implement them and there’s lots of
> support so it’s easier for you to share data with more people. For example,
> XML, CSV and JSON are open standards. *Read more*… (links to
> https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/183962/Open-Standards-Principles-FINAL.pdf
> )
>
>
> *Proposed changes*
> *A harmonised definition*
>
> The *work* *must* be machine-readable and provided in an open format. An
> open format is one which places no restrictions, monetary or otherwise,
> upon its use and can be fully processed with at least one
> free/libre/open-source software tool.
> In addition:
> - Data *should* be provided in bulk, i.e. the whole dataset can be
> downloaded easily.
> - An open format *should* be documented so it can be freely implemented
> by others.
> - An open format *should* be defined through a fair, transparent and
> collaborative process.
>
>  *Open Data Census and Open Data Certificates*
> Adjust questions and help text to reference the Open Format definition
> and/or conformant licenses page.
>
> *Open Definition site*
> - C
> onsider changing the page names from “Conformant Licences” and “Conformant
> Formats” to “Open Licences” and “Open Formats”.
> - Delete the open format definition page <http://opendefinition.org/ofd/>.
> It is replaced by the Open Formats page and the updated Open Definition.
>
>
>
> *What do you think? *
> Is this worth progressing? Could this extend to Open APIs like Web Map
> Services (WMS)?
>
>
> thanks
>
> Stephen Gates
> (localiser of the Open Data Census and Open Data Certificates in Australia)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> od-discuss mailing list
> od-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/od-discuss
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/od-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20150422/015fe086/attachment-0003.html>