[open-government] Defining Open Government Data?

[Tim McNamara]

On 20 October 2010 06:00, Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org> wrote:

> We'd like to start a process to encourage key stakeholders in the
> (rapidly growing!) world of open government data to have some
> consensus on what 'open government data' means.


Hi Jonathan,

Do you want to include what government means?

For example, there are a large number of agencies operate that operate at
considerable difference. State-owned businesses. privately funded
infrastructure (+ schools, prisons, et cetera), private organisations that
are contracted to provide service delivery? Speaking of New Zealand, while
the Crown exists as a sole legal entity, there are many shades of grey in
practice. For example, the Parliament's Office of the Clerk isn't subject to
our Official Information Act 1982 (or FOI legislation).

In the common law world, one possible test is whether an agency is subject
to judicial review.

One thing that I've noticed in many definitions (open access, open science)
is an attempt at creating a threshold of openness. That is, either things
are open or they are closed. One option for open government would be to
create a spectrum to reflect the fact that there are multiple degrees of
openness.

Finally, and from a more philosophical perspective, it's important that
people agreeing to the definition of why open government is important. That
will go some degree to allowing consensus about what a definition should be.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-government/attachments/20101020/2b255233/attachment-0001.html>