On 1/27/11 8:56 PM, Seth Cohn wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Philip Ashlock<p...
>> Hey Seth,
>> These look pretty good to me. I'm glad to see that they're following what
>> seem to be the best practices established in these policy areas.
> Well, the 'they' is me, for the most part,
It's really impressive for you to take this on. By "they" I just meant
the policies :)
> and the best practices were
Just for clarity for others listening, the best practices I'm referring
to are the Perens/OSI definitions for open source
> and open standards
> as well as the 8
principles of open data <http://resource.org/8_principles.html
> which I
discussed in my aforementioned blog post.
> actually hard to turn into good legislative language,
This might be the first open data policy I've seen that includes the 8
principles other than the one from Ottawa
but theirs wasn't nearly as integrated into the legislation as this one.
I've seen the 8 principles used so much that it seems like I've seen it
in other policies, but I can't think of any others (save for some
internal policies <http://wiki.civiccommons.org/Risk_Evaluation
As for the Perens definitions for open source and open standards, I know
that the open source definition was used by the state of California
and both of them were used by Vermont
I haven't really compared what you have to these too much, but if you
have a chance, it'd be great if you could outline some of the changes
you made in order to improve or adapt them for legislative language.
> so hopefully the
> next people down this road will find this easier than I did.
That's the beauty of building on and improving what's already out there.
Much appreciation for you having that attitude.
Gulp. Wow. Is that to encourage them to get money from "other sources"
Open Government Program Manager
> | @philipashlock
> | (360) 389-2741