From: philipashlock

Subject: repost: Unifying 311 systems toward an open standard

Date: Jun 17, 2009 12:03 AM

I'd intended to post this as a new thread, but it looks like I 
accidently just sent it as a reply of the previous one - 
http://lists.open311.org/discuss/archive/2009/06/1245210157409 Whoops, 
live and learn. In any case, this serves as a good reminder of how 
important it is to try to start fresh new threads with articulate and 
accurate subject lines whenever a new subject is discussed.

---

Thank you all for the thoughtful responses. I figured I'd try to defer 
replying until it could be done here on a mailing list. I've imported 
the earlier threads to the list <http://lists.open311.org/discuss/>, but 
please direct future messages to discuss@... and ensure 
that you're subscribed (you should've received an invite). 

I personally think it's important to echo Peter Corbett's emphasis on 
focusing standardization efforts around the only city that's currently 
supportive of implementing an open 311, D.C. <http://api.dc.gov/>, 
(maybe Vancouver too?) and the headway that's being made /right now/ 
through the Apps for Democracy contest 
<http://www.appsfordemocracy.org/>, so I'd like to keep action pushing 
in that direction.  That said, it seems to me that there exists a wider 
interest and knowledge base for the endeavor of creating an open 311 
system than is currently present in the D.C. effort, so I hope we can 
bring that together to help make the API coalescing there more robust 
and ensure that existing systems are more interoperable with whatever 
standard emerges.  I also hope that we can all work together to make 
Open311.org something that carries the momentum of the Apps for 
Democracy contest beyond it's final deadline in just two short weeks and 
helps cultivate and sustain legitimacy to a standard beyond D.C.. It 
wouldn't be much of a standard otherwise, would it?

One of the things an Open311.org wiki might be well suited for is 
aggregating the specs for 311 related APIs and tools so that one can 
begin to map out relationships and understand how existing systems can 
be coordinated to contribute to a unified platform.  I know that sounds 
lofty and abstract, so I don't want it to detract from the kind of core 
focus demonstrated by D.C.'s API, but it's important to consider how 
existing approaches (FixMyStreet, SeeClickFix, even Trac) and adjacent 
infrastructure can inform the evolution of the standard.  Likewise, 
looking to the future, it's valuable to consider how a standard like 
this can act as another layer in the emerging stack of civic information 
systems that everyone can use as a foundation for further innovation.

Here at The Open Planning Project 
<http://www.theopenplanningproject.org/> we've been a little slow in 
getting involved with pushing for this standard, but we do have a 
history of creating related systems (eg 2006 
<http://nyc.uncivilservants.org/>, 2008 
<http://demo.opengeo.org/vespucci/>, 2009 
<http://ideas.topplabs.org/wiki/Geo-mobile_Issue_Tracker>) and we carry 
some strong expertise in open geospatial systems (OpenGeo 
<http://opengeo.org/>). An open 311 standard falls directly in-line with 
our mission as a non-profit dedicated to using technology to improve 
civic life, so we'd like to help out as best we can. Through the next 
couple of weeks and beyond we'll be collaborating with OCTO Labs and the 
Apps for Democracy contest, SeeClickFix, and all of you on this list to 
create software that makes our cities shine.

Matt Cooperider suggested that ParticipationCamp would be a good venue 
for an open 311 code sprint (plus it coincides perfectly with the final 
round of Apps for Democracy), so that's definitely in the works.  I 
believe we're also slated to facilitate a sort of a "birds of a feather" 
session at Personal Democracy Forum where this topic should get good 
coverage.

So there you have it, I look forward to working together and keeping the 
conversation lively and constructive.

-Phil

/I've made the discuss <http://lists.open311.org/discuss/> list public, 
so please invite whoever you think should be involved. If you don't want 
to be subscribed, you can still follow the archives at:
http://lists.open311.org/discuss//

-- 

Philip Ashlock
The Open Planning Project -- http://theopenplanningproject.org
phil@... <mailto:phil@...> (917) 388-9046

Attachments

text.html (text/html) 7.4 kB