[@OKau] "High value" datasets

Tue Apr 14 12:39:39 UTC 2015

I would love to see some sort of commenting on our local CKAN install at
data.vic.gov.au, so we could work through data sets methodically and give
feedback on quality. It should be a conversation rather than a firehose,
and the CKAN install is the best place for that to happen. IMHO

L.
On Apr 14, 2015 20:28, "Rebecca Cameron" <rcameron.bis at gmail.com> wrote:

> Cassie
>
>
>
> There are two ways this issue was dealt with when I worked for Qld Gov,
> both primarily related to the use of the data. In theory some datasets
> could by academic defition be high value but if no one even opens the
> dataset it has little value. Therefore value was measured in terms of use.
>
>
>
> 1. CKAN allows for departments to measure page hits and down loads.
> Initially this process was performed manually so we could gauge which
> datasets added value and which datasets needed maturing or more frequent
> updating. From experience these measures are best-read 3 months after
> initial publication as the initial hits are usually because the data is
> newly published. I would hope in the last 6 months the capabilities of CKAN
> to provide this information has matured and most open data platforms should
> be able to provide this data. Qld Gov also publish on open data page-views
> by month see
> https://data.qld.gov.au/dataset/visitor-statistics-data-qld-gov-au
>
>
>
> 2. The reverse way of reading the questions is which datasets should be
> published first by departments because of their high public value. In
> setting the list of priority publications for a Qld Gov department a brief
> investigation was undertaken of page hits and downloads of data and
> information published on the departments website coupled together with
> records of requests for information both under FOI and researcher requests.
> This allowed for the most "valuable" datasets to be published. Bear in mind
> that the data being published related to the social services and had a
> particular researcher interest.
>
>
> In respect of the 5-star deployment scheme for Open Data all of the
> departments data was assessed against this schema and amended to meet the
> star rating. There is an OD form which accompanies this rating, but Qld Gov
> weren't ready to complete these.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Rebecca
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Cassie Findlay <findlay.cassie at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Has anyone come across good criteria or defined methods for identifying
>> 'high value' datasets? If, for example, you are looking at a whole of
>> government jurisdiction. I found some in this EU report
>> <http://ec.europa.eu/isa/documents/publications/report-on-high-value-datasets-from-eu-institutions_en.pdf>
>> but would like to gather some more.
>>
>> I realise that value is a highly subjective thing to assert (valuable for
>> whom, why?) and really like Rosie's work on defining the problems first, in
>> order to then work out where you might find datasets of value, but all that
>> aside :) - are there examples out there of work to define high value stuff?
>>
>> Many thanks
>>
>> Cassie Findlay
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> okfn-au mailing list
>> okfn-au at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-au
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-au
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-au mailing list
> okfn-au at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-au
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-au
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-au/attachments/20150414/2ac7a671/attachment-0004.html>