[Open-data-census] Methodological Questions about Index

Tue Mar 25 14:27:51 UTC 2014

Nice going on the Open Data Index - very useful to have these sorts of
metrics, especially because some countries tout their `open data` without
really being that open i.e. Brazil - Where I'm based.

I had three queries for you:
1. I am wondering why there is no scoring for the last three items at
https://index.okfn.org/about/#criteria
2. I'm also wondering why 'open licensing' is worth an inordinate score.
You can still use the data, generate some great facts and figures and have
those facts and figures published. Available in bulk, on the other hand, is
only worth 10 points, but without being able to process large bulk
datasets, open data becomes hugely limiting...
3. Isn't it silly to attribute points for governments having data (any data)
in paper form? If it is a precondition for scoring at all, why this
question itself included in the score? Same goes for number two - if it's
not in digital form, you might just call it `active transparency` and not
open data, correct?

I mean no offense, but I do think a healthy debate might improve metrics.

Thank you for your consideration.
GM

-- 
Gregory Michener

Brasil +(55) Work (21) 3799-5778  |  Cell (21) 8231-7777  |  Home (21)
3576-4116  |  Twitter @gregmichener  <https://twitter.com/gregmichener> |
skype greg_michener  |  http://gregmichener.com  |
http://observingbrazil.com |
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-data-census/attachments/20140325/a4b32f21/attachment.html>