Principes numériques

Suivre :

26 Octobre 2017

Note aux lecteurs

Nous vous remercions de vos commentaires et les analysons. Restez à l’affût d’un court résumé au début de 2018.

Nous élaborons actuellement un ensemble de principes pour guider la conception numérique au sein du gouvernement du Canada. Ces principes structureront la façon dont nous abordons la gestion de nos renseignements et de nos technologies ainsi que la prestation des services. Nous nous sommes basés sur les pratiques exemplaires à l’échelle internationale et nous cherchons de la rétroaction. Du 26 octobre au 8 decembre, vous aurez l’occasion de commenter notre ébauche des différents principes, soit en écrivant un commentaire dans le champ prévu au bas de ce blogue, soit en envoyant un courriel à open-ouvert@tbs-sct.gc.ca. Les commentaires reçus seront résumés et inclus dans un rapport « Ce que nous avons entendu » qui sera publié sur cette page.

Le gouvernement change. Et de façon majeure.

Le monde se transforme. Alors que nous entrons dans une nouvelle ère numérique, le gouvernement doit s’ajuster afin de répondre aux attentes changeantes des utilisateurs. Mais que signifie « numérique » de toute façon? Être numérique est plus grand que la somme de ses parties. Une organisation numérique en est une qui fleurit à l’ère numérique et continue de répondre aux attentes des utilisateurs.

Il s’agit de placer les utilisateurs en premier, de gérer les données et les renseignements, de veiller à ce que les renseignements des personnes soient sécuritaires et protégés, d’être ouverts et transparents dans la façon dont nous nous comportons et, bien sûr, d’utiliser la meilleure technologie afin d’appuyer le tout. Les personnes que nous servons sont au centre de tout ce que nous faisons. Absolument toutce que le gouvernement fait, il le fait pour la population. Alors que nous élaborons de nouveaux services et examinons ceux qui existent déjà, nous nous concentrons d’abord et avant tout sur les besoins des gens. Cela ne comprend pas seulement les services transactionnels, mais aussi la façon dont les personnes trouvent et utilisent les renseignements et les données.

Comment un gouvernement entreprend-il une transformation numérique d’envergure? On peut commencer par définir un ensemble de principes directeurs qui offrent une compréhension commune de ce à quoi ressemble une bonne conception numérique. Ils préparent la voie pour tout ce qui vient après, le fondement sur lequel la croissance peut se produire. Ils offrent de l’orientation pour la prise de décisions et nous aident à rendre explicites les concepts que nous allons privilégier au moment d’élaborer des services et de choisir des technologies.

Mais pourquoi commencer du début? La prémisse d’« ouverture » est de réutiliser, et les principes directeurs n’y font pas exception. D’autres gouvernements ont déjà fait un travail fantastique pour définir leurs principes et redéfinir la façon dont ils servent leur population. Par exemple, nous avons observé le Royaume-Uni (GDS), les États-Unis (USDS), l’Australie (AusDTO) et, un peu plus près de chez nous, la province de l’Ontario (Services numériques de l’Ontario). Nous aimons la façon dont ces groupes se sont rassemblé et ont ouvert grand les portes pour redéfinir leurs modèles de service du haut vers le bas. Il faut du courage. Nous avons emprunté ce qu’il y avait de meilleur, mais nous y avons ajouté une touche canadienne.

Premier jet

Nous partageons avec vous une première ébauche de nos principes numériques dans sa version brute et non filtrée, en espérant que vous nous aiderez à l’améliorer. Quoique nous devons reconnaître que ces principes ne seront jamais coulés dans le béton, mais évolueront avec le temps en fonction des changements de contexte, nous avons hâte de recevoir votre rétroaction afin de pouvoir aller de l’avant avec une version que nous pourrons mettre en pratique.

  1. Comprendre les utilisateurs et leurs besoins

    Commencer avec les besoins des utilisateurs et ensuite construire pour eux et avec eux. Mener des essais continus avec les utilisateurs. Faire le travail difficile afin qu’ils ne soient pas obligés de le faire.

  2. Effectuer constamment des itérations et des améliorations

    Conception agile au moyen des phases alpha, bêta et réelles. Effectuer des essais de bout en bout et apporter sans cesse des améliorations en réponse à la rétroaction des utilisateurs. Faire des essais le plus tôt et le plus souvent possible.

  3. Bâtir la bonne équipe

    Mettre sur pied et habiliter des équipes multidisciplinaires, en établissant des liens entre stratégie et exécution.

  4. Favoriser une culture axée sur le service

    Diriger une équipe et mettre en œuvre une culture ministérielle axée sur les utilisateurs.

  5. Travailler dans un environnement ouvert

    Échanger et collaborer dans un environnement ouvert, élaborer des plans pour faire en sorte que les données sont ouvertes dès le début.

  6. Intégrer, de façon équilibrée, la sécurité et la protection des renseignements dès le début

    Considérer le contexte opérationnel. Gérer les risques.

  7. Créer de façon ouverte et interopérable

    Considérer également les sources libres. Utiliser des normes ouvertes. Créer de façon interopérable et songer à ce qui peut être réutilisé.

  8. Utiliser les bons outils pour le travail

    Utiliser les solutions et les plateformes gouvernementales communes. Construire l’informatique en nuage d’abord.

  9. Concevoir et fournir des services transparents et éthiques

    Faire preuve d’ouverture et de transparence dans l’utilisation des systèmes automatisés et respecter les lignes directrices en matière d’éthique.

  10. Être inclusif et offrir du soutien pour ceux qui en ont besoin

    Favoriser un environnement inclusif, les langues officielles et l’accessibilité dans la conception.

  11. Connaître vos données

    Gérer les données conformément aux normes. Mettre en œuvre des outils analytiques et utiliser les données recueillies.

  12. Être responsable envers les Canadiens

    Définir les paramètres du rendement axé sur les utilisateurs. Publier des données en temps réel.

  13. Établir des partenariats ouverts et innovateurs

    Reconnaître qu’une organisation ne peut pas avoir toutes les meilleures idées. Créer des partenariats et collaborer.

  14. Dépenser l’argent judicieusement

    Signer des contrats de façon sensée et respecter les normes d’approvisionnement.

  15. Faire l’essai des services avec le sous-ministre ou le ministre

    Faire l’essai de tous les services destinés au public avec le sous-ministre ou le ministre responsable.

Dites-nous ce que vous pensez

Alors que je réfléchis à ces immenses changements qui se sont produits ces dernières décennies, partant d’une carte perforée de programmation dans les années 70 à l’« Internet des objets », je me questionne sur ce que les 30 prochaines années nous réservent.

Je suis certaine d’une chose : c’est que le gouvernement devrait faire partie de cette aventure avec nous et nous appuyer alors que nous vieillissons et que le numérique transforme notre façon de vivre, de travailler et de jouer. Donc, dans l’esprit de la collaboration et de l’ouverture, nous voulons vous entendre. C’est votre pays. C’est votre gouvernement. Dites-nous comment vous voulez voir le gouvernement passer à l’ère numérique en offrant votre rétroaction sur nos principes, soit en remplissant la boîte de commentaires plus bas ou en envoyant un courriel à open-ouvert@tbs-sct.gc.ca.

Merci,

Teresa D’Andrea

Responsable principale de la Stratégie relative aux services
Division du service et du gouvernement ouvert
Direction du dirigeant principal de l’information
Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor du Canada

La communication de l’information demandée sur ce formulaire n’est pas obligatoire. L’information est recueillie dans le but de répondre à votre demande de renseignements ou à vos commentaires et d’améliorer notre ensemble de produits et de services en ligne. Les renseignements personnels que vous fournissez sont protégés en vertu de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels, une loi fédérale. Veuillez ne pas inclure de renseignements personnels à caractère délicat dans le message, comme votre numéro d’assurance sociale, des renseignements financiers personnels et vos antécédents médicaux ou professionnels.

 
Lisez la Déclaration sur la protection des renseignements personnels du présent site Web.

La collecte et l’utilisation de vos renseignements personnels sont autorisées en vertu de l’article 7 de la Loi sur la gestion des finances publiques. La collecte et l’utilisation de vos renseignements personnels pour donnees.gc.ca se feront conformément à la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels, une loi fédérale. Vos renseignements personnels sont utilisés pour répondre à vos demandes de renseignements, s’il y a lieu, et peuvent être utilisés pour évaluer l’efficacité du programme quand vient le temps de répondre aux besoins des clients. Dans des circonstances exceptionnelles (p. ex., enquête sur les pirates informatiques ou sur les personnes qui font des menaces ou des remarques méprisantes, etc.), des renseignements personnels peuvent être communiqués sans votre consentement aux termes du paragraphe 8(2) de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels.

Tous les renseignements personnels qui peuvent être recueillis sont décrits dans le fichier de renseignements personnels ordinaire intitulé Communications publiques (POU 914), qui se trouve dans la publication Info Source du Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor du Canada (SCT). Les renseignements personnels recueillis seront conservés par le SCT pendant une période de 18 mois seulement après l’achèvement de l’activité, après quoi tous les renseignements d’identification seront supprimés.

En vertu de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels, vous avez le droit de demander l’accès à vos renseignements personnels et de les modifier si vous en avez fourni. Notez toutefois que, pour exercer l’un ou l’autre de ces droits, vous devez présenter une demande d’accès à vos renseignements personnels avant la fin de la période de conservation. Pour obtenir de plus amples renseignements sur votre droit d’accès, s’il vous plaît lire À propos du programme d’accèss à l’information.

Si vous avez besoin de précisions au sujet de cette déclaration, veuillez communiquer avec le coordonnateur de la protection des renseignements personnels du SCT au 613-957-7154. Pour obtenir de plus amples renseignements au sujet de vos droits en matière de protection des renseignements personnels et de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels, consultez le commissaire à la protection de la vie privée par le site du commissariat à la protection de la vie privée du canada ou au 1-800-282-1376.

Excellent draft. Open dialogue is essential.

I'd like to see something here on digital preservation. Content fuels service. Content fuels innovation. Content is our history.

My hope is to keep the human aspect ever present in the process of catching up and evolving. When we digitize and make electronic process its sometimes hard to talk factor in communication with a real person. I hope that with all this new technology that we can improve on that and keep that as a very important Human factor. As a user I always find that if an issue arises its more effective to speak directly to a live person, I hope this is still factored in in a good delivery process/service.

My comment is with regards to these principles in your draft list:
7. Build in an open and interoperable way
Give equal consideration for open source. Use open standards. Build in an interoperable and reusable way.
8. Use the right tools for the job
Use common government solutions and platforms. Build cloud first.

I can't help but feel that we as a government can do a better job of this in terms of creating a government-wide registration portal for all Canadian citizens. As it stands today, each department is building their own individual portals and there is no over-arching one to bring it all together. A single citizen may need to register into 10 different portals because they happen to need access to 10 different branches of the federal government. I propose an open source solution to this called the xRM Community Edition Portal which we could implement on top of the common Shared Case Management System (SCMS) platform that many departments are already using. Anyways, I can be contacted at Daniel.levesque@tc.gc.ca if anyone from TBS is willing to entertain this idea.

I think there is a missing element of "planned sustainability" in the principles. Digital information and technology is fragile because software and hardware can have short life spans. The Government of Canada needs to make responsible decisions to ensure that systems and information remain usable for as long as necessary. This includes capital replacement planning, ensuring retention and disposition functionality are included in GC systems and used, and ensuring that information relevant to the Government of Canada and Canadians can be accessed over time. Digital preservation and retention will have to come to the forefront of discussions on digital. It is fine to open information and data, but who will maintain it over time? And should they? It is a small subset of what we create that truly requires someone maintain it forever. It is wonderful to think about digital service delivery, but we need to think both short and long term: will we need this system or information in 50 days? 50 months? 50 years? 500 years? The approach we take to planned sustainability is VERY different depending on our answer, as are the costs. We can maintain public trust by having a planned approach and ensure long-term considerations (migration costs, etc.) are considered up front.

I don't see an item for security. How about "Make Security Usable: The most secure way to do something should also be the easiest way to do something."?

Dear/Sir/Ma I want to be my application to be successful

Hello,

This comment system leads to the team responsible for transparency and accountability work in the public service. We host datasets and records about many things, including historic statistics on immigration and visa applications, but we do not deal with these services directly.

You can go to the following website to learn more about immigration:
Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/apply.asp

Refugees and Asylum: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/index.asp

You can email your local IRCC office for direct help: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/offices/help.asp

Best Regards,

Momin
The Open Government team

“Test services with the Deputy Minister and/or Minister” should be changed to: “Require Deputy Minister and/or Minister to observe people trying to use their top services.”

Reasoning: The goal of this principle is effectively to break the empathy barrier between organizations and the people using their services. By focusing on observing live/recorded usability tests involving people, we will be more inclined to empathize with them. Also, DMs may have context that may make it easier for them to understand complex language that members of the public may not.

By focusing on top services, we encourage departments to prioritize and fix what matters most to people first. Without top task prioritization, resources will likely be spent observing and fixing things that matter to the department, instead of the people it serves.

Just so that we're on the same page, I will be working with a very dedicated team to review EVERY single comment made here, on social media, and sent to us via email. We will consider and discuss every idea that you've shared with us. Know that your input will help shape these principles, which in turn will help shape how your government serves you. So thank you. We couldn't do this without you.

Such a beautiful thing to hear so explicitly

Bonjour,
Félicitations pour ce beau travail de réflexion. La seule chose que je soulignerais, au sujet du numéro 15, est que "Signer des contrats de façon sensée"/"Enter into sensible contracts" est une formule complètement inusitée sur la plan linguistique et pratiquement vide de sens dans son contenu. Peut-être que les notions de "responsabilité" ou d' "optimisation" seraient plus descriptives de l'idée visée? Tout les contrats "font du sens" pour au moins un des partis.

Tu as raison Alexandre. Merci beaucoup d'avoir donné votre avis.

À l'instar du GDS britannique, il faut oser donner la priorité au logiciel libre, ce que FACiL recommande à tous les niveaux de gouvernement depuis des années aux côtés de l'April (France) et d'autres organismes de défense et de promotion du logiciel libre et des communs numériques à travers le monde.

La manière dont le Royaume-Uni a donné la priorité au logiciel libre est digne de mention. Elle a consisté à ériger en principe l'ouverture par défaut du code source des logiciels (pas seulement l'ouverture par défaut des données d'intérêt public), pour tous les nouveaux projets impliquant l'écriture de code :

8. Make all new source code open / Make all new source code open and reusable, and publish it under appropriate licences (or provide a convincing explanation as to why this can't be done for specific subsets of the source code). https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/service-standard

Cette approche peut et doit être adoptée minimalement par le gouv. fédéral du Canada.

Pour le reste de l'argumentaire de FACiL sur cette question et d'autres, voir nos plus récents mémoires :

https://facil.qc.ca/publications

For #3, "Build the right team", I'd add, "Create and empower DIVERSE, multidisciplinary teams, linking policy with delivery." As Minister Bryson said in his Sept. 22 blog post, Spotlight on Open Government at the United Nations, "...openness in government is about more than just data and information. It’s about inclusiveness. This means being open to different cultures and people, and to a diversity of views and new ways of thinking." This must include who gets hired on the Open Government team.

Portrait de mgifford

Absolutely. More diverse teams produce better outcomes. Well worth specifying here.

#7 Using open standards cannot be emphasized enough:
- Applications and versions matter less - Libreoffice, Office 2016, Office 2013, GoogleDocs all work from the same document format.
- Web applications are not tied to particular client operating system versions, which makes client OS uprades less troublesome and less costly.
- Procurements are more open, rather than restricted to one vendor. ETI is restricted to one vendor's proprietary client.

The specified Digital principles is a good start, but this list uses very generic language. I would like to see principles that clearly define the purpose for the principle. Far too often usable accessibility is sacrificed at the cost of principles that are too vague to interpret.

1. We need to shift government thinking from an "us and them" to a more inclusive model. Understanding users needs, building for the user, and conducting tests with the user, is a digital design model that will fail. Marginalized Canadians, such as those with vision loss, must be integrated into the design, development, and decision making process. Experts may understand accessibility issues, but do not necessarily experience them.
2. Iterative testing, early and often, throughout the processes is critical, but evaluating user feedback can be a challenge and often leads to bigger end-user accessibility issues.
3. Building the right team is important, but who defines what that means. If people with disabilities are not given an opportunity to be an active partner on the management team, then the design and development is not inclusive. Currently the CDS team does not represent blind Canadians.
4. I am not sure what a service-oriented culture means, but the focus should be on inclusive design and not digital delivery.
5. Open collaboration is important, but that does not necessarily mean inclusive collaboration. Assistive technology users that struggle to interact with the internet, tend to be excluded from online social media discussions. This will lead to a bias understanding of accessibility needs.
6. For the most part, IT security and privacy concerns tend to trump the accessibility needs of disabled users, which then marginalizes them while they wait for a solution.
7. Yes, use open standards, but be sure the design and development tools and processes comply with those standards.
8. Use the right tools. Right for whom?
9. Automated systems must be accessible at both the design and delivery stages.
10. Accessibility by design? This is a phrase that has little meaning out of context. Many websites are built according to the WCAG standards, and yet are unusable by blind screen reader users.
11. Unfortunately accessibility experts collect bias user experience data, that tends to reflect their perception of the disability.
12. Be accountable to all Canadians, particularly those are most effected by digital communication services. We need a better partnership between government IT decision makers and those that live with vision loss.
13. Create partnerships with grass root organizations that represent the various disability sectors, and not just with service organizations and health experts.
14. One of the biggest employment barriers for blind Canadians is the broken government procurement processes and restrictive ICT contracts that eliminate competition and innovation.
15. Inclusive accessibility, not just accessibility standards, must be understood by those responsible for digital government design, development, and delivery.

You're right - we are very "us and them". Let's change that. Thank you David for following up with us and providing this feedback. Much appreciated.

Thank you all for taking the time to contribute. Very well thought-out comments.

I want to submit some information around principle 10e inclusive and provide support for those who need it
Build in inclusiveness, official languages, and accessibility by design.

I believe strongly that the above statement is a good starting direction.

I think it is critical that we not forget the lessons learnt and work done in the past. Specifically by areas like AAACT
http://service.ssc.gc.ca/en/contact/partclisupport/aaact

Also, that we identify that the minimum of what must be met isn't "inclusive" but simply sets the lowest common denominator that should be present in government activities. Meeting the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.x at a double A level of conformance is simply being compliant to court order: see: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/court-orders-ottawa-to-make-websites-accessible-to-blind/article1316244/

We should adopt the EU Accessible Procurement Standard and related toolkit as our new minimum. This puts us in alignment with Australia and other federal governments who have recognised this as the modern minimum. We should report on our compliance in an open way that shares information and best practices at a global level with the EU standard as the foundation.

We should exceed these requirements and strive for continuous improvement above that minimum.

Internally inside the government of canada, there is a lot of additional work to be done to create an inclusive environment for people with disabilities. For example, see: ACCESSIBLE CANADA CONSULTATION: SUBMISSION FROM THE ASSOCIATION OF FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVANTS WITH VISION IMPAIRMENTS http://www.fpswd.com/2017/02/27/accessible-canada-consultation-submission-from-the-association-of-federal-public-servants-wit...

Despite having a center of expertise and knowledge area with training courses, modern processes and mentoring for areas, these are rarely taken of advantage of before a complaint. They should be mandatory - See AAACT offerings: http://service.ssc.gc.ca/en/contact/partclisupport/aaact

Inclusive Design of Information and Communication Technology requires a holistic approach that includes accessibility standards, inclusive practices, usability or user acceptance testing that includes people with disabilities and exception management. Overall, ICT Digital Inclusion falls into 3 areas: Procurement/development, Implementation and Support.

There are 3 major areas of focus:
• Enterprise systems (e.g. GCDocs, PSPM, etc.),
• Workplace devices (e.g. PC, mobile, MFDs)
• Adaptive Technologies

____________________________________________________________________
Enterprise systems (e.g. GCDocs, PSPM, etc.),

Examples of Issues to consider relating to Enterprise systems:
• Procurement/Development
o Software is designed, developed and procured without following accessibility standards and without verifying compliance.
 “Lack of “virtual wheelchair ramps”
• Implementation
o Enterprise systems and Software is implemented or customised and implemented without following accessibility standards, verifying compliance.
o No compatibility testing with common Adaptive Technology tools
o Usability testing, pilots or user acceptance testing doesn’t include people with disabilities
 “we will solve that later”
o Training and reference material isn’t accessible and doesn’t include keyboard shortcuts for adaptive technology users
• Support
o No way to quickly or easily fix issues related to accessibility or compatibility with user adaptive tools when the problem relates to the original system and its lack of standard compliance
 No support for temporary alternatives

____________________________________________________________________
Workplace devices (e.g. PC, mobile, MFD)

Examples of Issues to consider relating to Workplace devices:
• Procurement/Solution Development
o Workplace devices are procured without following accessibility standards, verifying compliance and do not include an additional layer of functional criteria related to the needs of people with disabilities
 E.g. no easy inexpensive way to get a laptop with a better video card through mainstream process
• Implementation
o Department’s implementation of a workplace device often ads additional restrictions, limitations and does not include adaptability, flexibility, planned exceptions or alternatives
o No Compatibility testing with common Adaptive Technology tools
o Training and reference material isn’t accessible and doesn’t include keyboard shortcuts for adaptive technology users
o Usability testing, pilots or user acceptance testing doesn’t include people with disabilities
 “we will solve that later”
• Support
o Years of time and additional effort required to accommodate employees with disabilities
 E.g. in one department the average time to get someone with voice recognition a computer that meets the hardware requirements for voice recognition with the right version of the software installed is approximately one year (common delays due to discussions and approvals related to procurement/exception/internal imaging/GPOS/testing/etc.)
o No way to quickly or easily fix issues in the implementation of the mainstream device related to accessibility or compatibility with user adaptive tools
o No support for temporary or permanent alternatives

____________________________________________________________________
Adaptive Technologies

Examples of Issues to consider relating to Adaptive Technologies:
• Procurement/Development
o There are very few issues related to procurement of adaptive technology that relate to the actual procurement process
 Departments can easily understand “I get person A item B” such as a braille display
• Implementation
o IT areas have very little knowledge in how to support or configure the base OS/office suite/etc. to work for each user with disability’s adaptive technology
o IT areas do not provide the average user with service/support for mainstream technology let alone adaptive technology and no support in the implementation of the tools within the technical environment
o The person with a disability is expected to be the expert in IT support of their tools
o Because very little attention is given to the accessibility of enterprise systems and workplace devices the end user’s technology is blamed.
 E.g. like blaming the person’s wheelchair for not being able to get into the building when we have failed to provide the wheelchair ramps
• Support
o Very little knowledge in how to configure the base OS/office suite/etc. to work for each user with disability’s adaptive technology
o IT areas do not provide the average user with service/support for mainstream technology let alone adaptive technology and no support in the implementation of the tools within the technical environment
o The person with a disability is expected to be the expert in IT support of their tools
o Mainstream technology training is mostly inaccessible and No budgeted training for adaptive technology users on mainstream technology

Portrait de mgifford

This is great Jeff. The focus on procurement is so important. I've been trying to document procurement best practices for accessibility and you've outlined somethings I don't think have ome up in this collection of best practices https://github.com/mgifford/a11y-contracting/

Discover-ability is so important for anyone using a digital interface. Building technology that is serving a purpose, technically accessible, but providing a good UX experience for the person (whether or not they have a disability).

I'd love to see more focus on encouraging ATAG 2.0 adoption in government procurement.

Noted. Thank you Jeffrey for the very detailed summary. I agree, we could do better. Much better. Your input has really helped put this into perspective.

Hello, I am a federal government applied scientist and manager in an IT-intensive line of work. I have done my share of multidisciplinary management, including IT and services to the public.
As a draft, those are almost all good principles, and I would like to see a strong commitment from IT shops in all Departments to apply them to internal services as well as external services. I don't think we can credibly commit to good external services if we can't deliver good internal services. Phoenix is the example that sticks out like a sore thumb, but there are many others I could rattle down. This hasn't been a good decade.
I do have an issue with #15 in its current wording. I understand we are accountable to the DM and Minister, but it is my direct experience that requiring approbations from, say, 6 DG in at least two different departments, already makes us plenty accountable if we can even make any progress at all. Also, "public facing" can have more than one meaning. Does it always mean John and Jane Doe, or could it also mean specialized socio-economic stakeholders? International partners? Other levels of government? Emergency responders? A mixture? The presentation, mode of access and type of data can be quite different in to address numerous different audiences, and I seriously doubt that the Minister is going to be our tester for all of it, unless we are advocating micromanagement on an epic level.

On another subject, in item #5 I would suggest to add source code as something that should be open.

Item 13 raises the matter of who may initiate projects, and the matter of agility in innovation. The current climate in government IT guarantees paralysis. The projects that my predecessors were able to jumpstart in 2004 would be impossible to even begin today. I know first hand, and my ADM himself told me so.

Another principle that I would like to make sure is covered, is that special cases are often your most important cases that define your business. I have seen too many examples where there is an ignorant approach to special cases in the name of "simplifying" IT. A somewhat made up example: weather warnings require special infrastructure that is different from, say, a clerical pool. It makes no sense to build your infrastructure around the clerical pool requirements and then to try to "standardize" the weather warning system on that infrastructure. I could give you a real-life example of a government-wide mission-critical system for international emergency response that has been rendered dysfunctional by the changes in the e-mail system, with no solution in sight. This, after we were "consulted" and duly ignored.

All this to say, I broadly support your list, but there is a heck of a culture change to bring about.
Thank you for reading this through, I know it was a little of a rant.

They are good but I think the order of presentation needs more thought.

Please note to all commenters that this "open government" comment box is only posted subject to administrator approval. This goes fundamentally against the idea of "open by default". How will there be meaningful conversations/feedback when these smoke screens obfuscate transparency? What are the criteria for approval?

Hello,

Thank you for your comment.

Approvals of comments are subject to our Rules of Engagement which can be found here: http://open.canada.ca/en/rules-engagement

Regards,

Momin
The Open Government team

Agreed, they are all great ideas. At this point it feels like an echo chamber, ideas get recycled and the same issues come up over and over again. How will this initiative be different?

Great set of Principles and suggestions as well :)

I propose to add "and source code" to #5 to be more specific:

Work in the open
Share and collaborate in the open, plan to make data and source code open from the start.

It would align with UK and AU #8 Principle as well.

Nothing original here. All of them or copied from U.K., Australia and elsewhere. They are a mishmash of everything and don't provide a proper rationale. Whatever happened to the UX principles TBS had few years ago? Don't just copy from others but get your own. Be a leader and not a follower. Be original. Tweeting them is not enough without a plan on how you will implement them with all the Departments. How will you ensure compliance? Do the departments care? I bet this is one more get-on-the-bandwagon exercise which will fall by the way side. Everyone who started this will get their promotions and be gone in a couple of years, while this will gather dust and be confined in the dust bins if TBS. same old story.. what's new??

Date de modification :