[Gfoss] Cost Recovery Policies are NOT Synonymous with Data Quality

[Piergiorgio Cipriano]

Interessante post di Slashgeo <http://slashgeo.org/>, che rimanda al blog
canadese datalibre.ca:
http://datalibre.ca/2007/07/17/cost-recovery-policies-are-not-synonymous-with-data-quality/

[...]

For *Parcel Datasets* the study discovered that datasets that were assembled
from a centralized authority were judged to be technically more advanced
while those that require assembly from multiple jurisdictions with
standardized or a central institution integrating them were of higher
quality while those of multiple jurisdictions without standards were of poor
quality as the sets were not harmonized and/or coverage was inconsistent.
Regarding non-technical characteristics many datasets came at a high cost,
most were not easy to access from one location and there were a variety of
access and use restrictions on the data.

For *Topographic Information* the technical averages were less than ideal
while for non-technical criteria access was impeded in some cases due to
involvement of utilities (tendency toward cost recovery) and in other cases
multiple jurisdictions - over 50 for some - need to be contacted to acquire
a complete coverage and in some cases coverage is just not complete.

[...]
... che a sua volta cita un paper della Delft University of Technology
(Bastiaan
van Loenen <http://www.bastiaanvanloenen.nl/> e Jitske de
Jong)<http://www.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=44426a15-cce8-4fad-b8f0-bb2d5aa88757&lang=nl>
"The impact of institutional choices relative to access policy and data
quality on the development of geographic information
infrastructures"<http://www.gsdi9.cl/english/papers/TS8.2paper.pdf>


pg

-- 
Piergiorgio Cipriano
pg.cipriano a gmail.com
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML ? stato rimosso...
URL: http://www.faunalia.com/pipermail/gfoss/attachments/20070718/699ecf3d/attachment.htm