Thanks for the huge email and for all your work on this project ... there is a lot going on ... and a lot to keep tabs on. And I am finding that pretty hard!
I think that your list of assumptions are very important and I wonder if everyone reads them and takes the same meaning from them ... I must admit I sometimes feel confused about some of this and what its relationship is with things that already exist.
From the AIRS/211 point-of-view, we see this project as an opportunity to work with people who know what they are doing on the technology/data front in order to provide organizations (government, nonprofit and commercial) that maintain community resource information with the opportunity to dramatically increase the portability/accessibility of community information by allowing it to move (with permission) onto open platforms and therefore onto other systems/applications -- so it can help more people in more ways. And for these open standards to link up with similar open standards such as Open311 and NIEM. We appreciate that this is not being done "for us" but for the communities we serve.
I think this is the same project!
I (and I believe others) are OK with having some of our long-time assumptions challenged and tested, as long as the final results are based on things which are as verifiable and practical as possible.
- Interoperability between AIRS / 2-1-1 standards (schema/taxonomy) and new standards such as the W3C civic services schema is possible (Clive: The project is to create open data community resource standards that would allow existing data sources such as I&R/AIRS/211 to be interoperable with other human services systems and applications. And for any new data sources that emerge to adopt the same structure. Is this the same thing?)
- Data standards are a necessary and effective step towards making community resource directory data openly available. Standards will also help spur innovation, lower the cost of development, and strengthen a community of practice in this field. (Clive: What are data standards in this context? Are they related to data management? Or arrangements of data elements/attributes? What is a community of practice that is different from one that already exists?)
- The production of open community resource directory data can be sustainable. (Clive: I would go with "more sustainable" for yes ...)
- Communities already have most if not all of the resources that they need to sustainably produce reliable open data. But these resources are currently trapped in silos, and it will require both technological development and social facilitation to break down those silos.(Clive: Existing resource databases need technological innovation and genuine partnerships to allow them to become accessible in more ways, to more people in more places. ... is this the same thing? And if it is, can you see why it is different?!)
- The cost of maintaining up-to-date resource data can be lowered by opening systems to receive input from users.(Clive: As mentioned a few times, virtually all of the software currently used by I&R agencies allows listed organizations to access their data and submit changes, and for change requests to be pushed out directly to those organizations and often for anyone using the public site to submit information based on their experience "I phoned and it said it was closed". I am not sure what dramatically changes with this 'change'. Maybe there will be an increased visibility impact as more folks become conscious of the data - although there is an impact on the other side of the equation as the more info coming in, the more management of it that is required - but having more accurate data is obviously a good thing)
- The cost of data upkeep will not drop to zero, and some designated steward of the data is important to ensure reliability and accountability. (Clive: I don't think it will drop at all but I would be happy if it did so. I wonder if this is a disconnect with the concept of data standards ... I&Rs have data standards that yes, makes the work more challenging in order to make the data more clear and concise. Does this project surmise that this will no longer be happening?)