RE: [egov] RE: Starting Discussion to Get Your Advice and Help wi thE-Forms for E-Gov

["Probert, Sue" <Sue.Probert@commerceone.com>]

Hi John

 

Thanks for opening up this thread. It is very interesting.

 

As I believe you already know, I am currently working with SITPRO (UK Simpler Trade Procedures body) and UN/ECE to further develop the UN/ECE edocs project in conjunction with the UK Electra export web forms project. Both UNedocs and Electra are e-form projects based on the UN Aligned Paper Document standards which have been a mainstay to support cross-border trade for over forty years and they both include the definition of XML document equivalent schemas. Our future plans include harmonising the UNedocs and Electra work with a) UN/CEFACt's ebXML Core Components and b) the UBL ebXML CC compliant XML naming and design rules and the UBL library itself which is also developing in line with the ebXML CC technical specification.

 

I believe that it would be very interesting to investigate how all these interests in eforms for governmental purposes could be coordinated especially if we can achieve that in a harmonised manner. I would certainly like to put my name down to join any sub-committee activity that you may form on this subject.

 

In addition I would also like to join the web services sub-committee.

 

regards and best wishes for 2003.

 

Sue

 

Sue Probert
Senior Director, Document Standards
Commerce One
Mobile: +44 7798 846652
Tel: +44 1425 275117 or +44 1753 483000
email: sue.probert@commerceone.com

-----Original Message-----
From: John.Borras@e-Envoy.gsi.gov.uk [mailto:John.Borras@e-Envoy.gsi.gov.uk]
Sent: 06 January 2003 08:59
To: Owen_Ambur@fws.gov; roy.morgan@nist.gov; 'Brand Niemann'; Kevin Williams
Cc: Diane.Lewis@usdoj.gov; roy.morgan@nist.gov; egov@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [egov] RE: Starting Discussion to Get Your Advice and Help with E-Forms for E-Gov

First - let me apologise to all.  Quite rightly it's been pointed out to me that we should copy the e-gov lists in on these e-mails so all members of the TC can contribute.  All to note for the future please.

Owen  
You seem to have misinterpreted what I was saying about the forms being USA specific..  The point I was making was the list that was being referred to in the previous e-mails was in fact a list of USA forms that on a cursory glance didn't seem to have too much international application.  What I was trying to say was that we should concentrate on a form or forms that had some international applicability, and clearly passports and visas fall into that category.  So we are clearly on the same wave-length on this point.   I would propose that we ask Diane to put this as a high priority for the work on the Services sub-committee, and depending on the availability of resources, she could do one or perhaps more than one form.  So as a starter can you and others who have an interest in this put your hands up to become members of that SC please.

I'm with you on the major role of the TC.  If we do no more than coordinate efforts then we will achieve quite a lot, but it would be nice to do more than that if we can.  

With regard to a better way of collaborating, we heard from Karl in Baltimore about a new support system for OASIS TCs that should come into play in March.  If I understood it right that should provide the sort of facilities that you mention and will provide for closed consultation within the TC and also open consultation for the wider world.  We can review this at our next TC meeting in March.

John
 

"Kevin Williams" <kevin@blueoxide.com> 03/01/2003 03:28

To:        <Owen_Ambur@fws.gov>, "'Brand Niemann'" <bniemann@cox.net>, <John.Borras@e-Envoy.gsi.gov.uk>         cc:        <Diane.Lewis@usdoj.gov>, <roy.morgan@nist.gov>         Subject:        RE: Starting Discussion to Get Your Advice and Help with E-Forms for E-Gov

All:

While I agree with John that XForms is still a bit of a
technology-in-flux (and it may take some time for a single standard to
emerge as the XML acquisition technology of choice), I also agree with
Owen that there is some low-hanging fruit to be had in the forms area.
The great thing about XML, naturally, is that it allows us to tackle
these problems separately; that is, we can work together to define and
agree upon the information that needs to be gathered as part of the
business processes (passport applications, import/export documentation,
etc.) without necessarily focusing too closely on the presentation side
of the equation just yet. In my mind, the presentation layer is further
subdivided into two tasks: the data acquisition process (which may be
best served by a technology that has not yet matured, such as XForms),
and data presentation (which is served well by mature technologies such
as XSLT). I'm all for making the user experience consistent across all
government systems (both here in the US and across international
borders), but my feeling is that a common vocabulary focus should
definitely be the first step towards making this happen. If this
vocabulary is well-planned and as complete as possible, it can be
leveraged beyond the bounds of the specific tasks to be reused across
larger efforts later.

It also makes sense to me that we need some effective mechanism for
collaboration - as some of you know, I (and my company) have definite
opinions in that regard. I will add, however, that in my experience
working on the MISMO data standard early in its lifecycle, I discovered
that using collaboration software (that I had to build by hand) to break
out of the "let's all meet once a quarter, let's email DTDs back and
forth" mode of XML structure development enabled us to finally make
progress and succeed where previous efforts had not.

- Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Owen_Ambur@fws.gov [mailto:Owen_Ambur@fws.gov]
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 5:49 PM
To: Brand Niemann; John.Borras@e-Envoy.gsi.gov.uk
Cc: Diane.Lewis@usdoj.gov; roy.morgan@nist.gov; kevin@blueoxide.com
Subject: Re: Starting Discussion to Get Your Advice and Help with
E-Forms for E-Gov


Brand & John, FYI -- with further reference to my message below, GAO's
eGov
report criticizes OMB for failure to follow through on the avowed intent
to
make eGov applications customer focused.  GAO recommends that OMB
should:
a) solicit input from the public, and b) develop and document effective
collaboration strategies:  http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03229.pdf

As I said at the OASIS e-Gov TC meeting in Baltimore, it seems to me
that
facilitating collaboration is the essence of the TC's task.  Moreover,
it
seems to me that the specific focus of collaboration should be the
elements
(schemas) comprising the forms that citizens are expected to complete in
order to interact with and obtain services from government.  Otherwise
the
effort is anything *but* citizen centered.

Of course, too, there must be better means than F2F meetings and/or
E-mail
to gather input from the public and to facilitate collaboration among TC
members.  Such means must include a registry of some sort, a Web
interface,
and features to facilitate public input.  They should also include more
specialized means for resolving needless inconsistencies and
redundancies
among data elements as well as differences of opinion among TC members.

Owen





                     Owen Ambur

                                              To:
John.Borras@e-Envoy.gsi.gov.uk                    
                     01/02/03 11:21 AM        cc:      "Brand Niemann"
<bniemann@cox.net>,                
                                              Daniel.Vogelheim@sun.com,
jeanpa@Microsoft.com,            
                                              jon.bosak@sun.com,
marion.royal@gsa.gov,                    
                                              mdubinko@cardiff.com,
Diane.Lewis@usdoj.gov,                
                                              GREEVESR@OJP.USDOJ.GOV,
Leonard.Starling@usdoj.gov,        
                                              saboe@ndf.org,
ghayes@mitre.org, jdodd@csc.com,            

CAROLINE.DAVIS.ROBERTS@saic.com                            
                                              Subject: Re: Starting
Discussion to Get Your Advice and    
                                              Help with E-Forms for
E-Gov(Document link: Owen Ambur)      





John, with reference to your proposal, personally, I'd be pleased if we
could start with as few as *one* form that is in *actual usage* and
proceed
from there as time and resources allow.

However, I must take issue with your contention that focusing on the
forms
that are used to conduct governmental business would be USA-specific and
would require redundant efforts for every nation.  To the contrary, the
intent would be to *reduce* the need for redundant efforts not only
across
national boundaries but also within them -- by specifying the data
elements
that are common to governmental functions worldwide and doing so in a
manner that focused on actual practice (existing forms) rather than the
king's notion of how the people's business "might" or "should" be
conducted
in a perfect world.

With respect to where to start, it seems to me that passport and visa
forms, and the documentation supporting them, might be good candidates.
Other likely candidates include import/export forms.  And, since
everyone
is *talking* about "citizen centered" services, it seems to me that we
ought to put our money where our mouths are and *specify* in data
elements
and schemas what we mean when we use that term.  (Many of the person
metadata elements required to specify citizen centric services would
also
be common to homeland security applications.)  However, the bottom line
is
that the effort should be focused and defined by the people (communities
of
interest/practice) and resources volunteered and/or otherwise brought to
bear in pursuit of the vision and strategic objectives of the TC.

BTW, with respect to vision, it seems to me that the concept of "freedom
of
information" fairly well captures it and that, ultimately, we should be
aiming to establish an international standard for freedom of
information.

Owen Ambur, Co-Chair
XML Working Group
USCIOC
http://xml.gov/





                     John.Borras@e-Envoy

                     .gsi.gov.uk                 To:      "Brand
Niemann" <bniemann@cox.net>                
                                                 cc:
Daniel.Vogelheim@sun.com, jeanpa@Microsoft.com,    
                     01/02/03 07:07 AM           jon.bosak@sun.com,
marion.royal@gsa.gov,                    
                                                 mdubinko@cardiff.com,
Owen_Ambur@fws.gov                    
                                                 Subject: Re: Starting
Discussion to Get Your Advice and    
                                                 Help with E-Forms for
E-Gov                                






Brand

Our strategy here in the UK is to use XForms in the future but only when
the market adequately supports that standard.  So as far as the e-Gov TC
is
concerned I would expect us to say something along those lines as part
of
our Best Practice guidance.  Producing actual implementations of any
particular form is another question, and I would only see us doing that
if
the form in question had some international use.  The list of forms you
refer to appear to be totally USA specific and therefore I would not see
it
as the role of the TC to deliver the schemas for them.  If we do that
for
USA then we would be obliged to do it for every country!

So maybe the best way forward is to select a small number of forms that
have some international usage and the TC promotes a pilot to deliver the
schemas for them as an exemplar.   This would be a good example of my
wish
to deliver small packages of work quickly from the TC.

How does that proposal grab folks?

John



  "Brand Niemann"

  <bniemann@cox.net>          To:        <jeanpa@Microsoft.com>,

                      <jon.bosak@sun.com>,

                      <John.Borras@e-envoy.gsi.gov.uk>,

  27/12/2002 13:31    <mdubinko@cardiff.com>,
<Daniel.Vogelheim@sun.com>  
                              cc:        <Owen_Ambur@fws.gov>,

                      <marion.royal@gsa.gov>

                              Subject:        Starting Discussion to
Get  
                      Your Advice and Help with E-Forms for E-Gov






I have been asked by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to
provide
information and advice on E-Forms Applications for E-Government. Our
main
compilation of forms is found at
http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/content/offerings_content.jsp?contentOID=11636
9&contentType=1004&P=1&S=1
where the initial emphasis has been on the new Section 508
accessibility
requirements.

Owen Ambur has long suggested we start with say the "top 100 standard
and
optional forms" to implement an XML-standards based approach and I
certainly concur. Of course this will not be successful unless we have
the
involvement and support of the major players in the software
applications
and standards efforts like yourselves. Would you be willing to support
the
development and implementation of such an approach? What would it take
to
get say the "top 100 standard and optional forms" to appear as
templates/schemas in the XDocs, OpenOffice, XForms-compliant products,
etc.? Could/should we use the UBL in this effort? Could/should this be a
formal pilot project under the new OASIS E-Government TC?

We are planning the agendas for the February XML (19th) and XML Web
Services (18th) Working Group Meetings around this topic and would
invite
your input and participation (see http://xml.gov and
http://web-services.gov).

Thank you for your consideration of this matter,

Brand Niemann
Chair, CIO Council XML Web Services Working Group
Member, OMB Solution Architects Working Group






PLEASE NOTE: THE ABOVE MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INTERNET.

On entering the GSI, this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet (GSI) virus scanning service supplied exclusively by Cable & Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs.

GSI users see http://www.gsi.gov.uk/main/new2002notices.htm for further details. In case of problems, please call your organisational IT helpdesk.