Since the TAG meeting in Tanzania, I have had several strands of thought floating around in my head and on scraps of paper.
These are concerned with the idea of how we in the tech community can help make IATI more usable.
I’m encouraged by the range of people wanting to use the data for a wide range of purposes, but I also hear from people that they are frustrated at not being able to get hold of the data in the way that suits them best.
You can read the latest iteration on this Google Doc. Thank you to those who have given constructive feedback so far.
In summary, I am proposing four actions
- Separate the definition of the standard from its technical implementation
- Build a Repository, not just a Registry
- Simplify the standard for different user needs through a modular approach.
- Encourage the development of interoperable tool components as global public goods
I’d love to hear what you think, either online here or if you are able to be with the MA in Rome next week. Please post your comments in this discussion thread and not in the document.
Hi Reid, many thanks for being the first to comment and react, your comments are very helpful. A few comments back (maybe each of the points need a separate thread!)
The core user need I have in mind here is to help the standard work for people whose natural technology is Excel. Publishers should not need to know about the IATI relational model - tools (like CoVE) should obfuscate this for them. Similarly, end users should be able to download in different formats, and again should not need to know the full detail of the IATI data model. I think I’m asking here for tools to hide the relational model from end users, much like we already do with BI tools within organisations.
I think there is a need for IATI itself to provide a curated data store so that end users can extract the data they need in the format that they need it. Otherwise, everyone who needs to use the data has to build one, or understand the differences between the different aggregators. But I’m not sure whether that is indeed a consensus among the TAG community, and I’d be interested to hear what others feel about it.
Yes, although I think we need to revisit how extensions and rulesets would work better, and some practical examples would help.
Yes, this is indeed already a thing, and the community is brilliant in building things in the open. But I wonder how we could be more strategic in co-ordinating this effort so that we can better meet the data use user needs. I like your thinking around a consortium of donors who would be willing to support strategic investment.