An evolving relationship: map libraries and data producers Grace Welch May 31, 2002 ACMLA/CAPDU...
-
Upload
brendan-clement-hardy -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
2
Transcript of An evolving relationship: map libraries and data producers Grace Welch May 31, 2002 ACMLA/CAPDU...
An evolving relationship: map libraries and data producers
Grace WelchMay 31, 2002
ACMLA/CAPDU Conference
Outline Some history What are we missing in terms of
data? What are the outstanding issues? Future directions and priorities What can we do as individuals and
as an association to work with data producers?
A look at the past 1995: ARL GIS Literacy Program
comes to Canada First data arrives in our library:
DCW – only Canadian data in our libraries until
DLI – census boundaries, streets ArcCanada
You’ve come a long way baby!
Not quite famine to feast
But detailed national data now available
DMTI data DSP for maps Provincial deals
for academics
Milestones: DLI First consortia access to
government data Helped develop data expertise in
libraries training in Halifax, Saskatoon, London
Demand growing exponentially on our campuses
Supporting structure for libraries
Milestone: Geogratis Federal “legacy” data for download Began with CLI Now one of the most heavily used
data sites in Canada Largest user by type is other
government departments
Milestone: City of Ottawa & NCC
City of Ottawa provides GIS datasets on their web site for non-commercial purposes; free to download
NCC offers complementary data to “data poor” universities
First large scale city type data for universities
Milestone: DMTI First commercial company to offer
affordable access Over 40 university & colleges
participating in consortium Models for other educational
initiatives On-going support
Milestone: DSP for Maps Includes: digital topographic maps
and related products for entire country, digital geology maps
Available to educational institutions with GIS capabilities
5 year program, license to be reviewed in one years’ time
Other federal data initiatives CANSIS being enhanced Daily climate data to be included in
DSP- two CD set, translation still issue
Government policy initiatives: KPMG study on pricing Standard licensing for data sharing
GeoBase available in next year
Provincial gov’t: successesSeveral models for provision of data toacademia New Brunswick $1.00 sale to UNB (now free
and available to other universities) Alberta govt. agreement with universities 2
years ago Some provinces offer discounted prices for
NTDB Manitoba: new agreement Policies vary by province and by department
Provincial gov’t: challenges?
Problem areas: Ontario & Quebec Ontario: negotiating since 1992
Paying for infrastructure development Individual departments supportive, e.g. MTO, OMAFRA, Municipal Affairs, OGS
Quebec: still negotiating, considering DSP model
Provinces: issues Variation in support, hit or miss
depending on request E.g. roads data from B.C. Yukon DEM
Generally based on educational institutions in province – not always known to other institutions
Municipal data Like provinces, widely variable Arrangements based on single or
local institutions Hard to acquire comparable
municipal data for provincial/national studies
Lack of adequate metadata
Evolutionary process: THEN Our relationship with data
producers: Constrained by cost/recovery policies Mapping type services slashed in
early, mid-90s Had to justify GIS investments to their
managers Data leakage paranoia
Evolutionary process: NOW Most data producers supportive Recognize value of encouraging
GIS in educational sector Want policies to change but slow,
painful process Trying to standardize licensing Educational offers available
Factors promoting change CGDI and GeoConnections!!! Success of DLI Educational sector champions Government focus on knowledge
economy New models to build on: DMTI
Challenges Process slow and invisible Licensing – too many, too detailed No consistency in approach to
educational sector Still pockets of mistrust Copyright
Unresolved problems Institutes/collaborative projects:
usually outside licensing arrangements
Lack of knowledge about individual agreements
Management of multiple licenses Tracking of individual users
What can we do? Become involved in process Look for partnering opportunities Recognize success Share expertise Ensure data is used
To work on Need reciprocal agreements Promotion of metadata Development of our delivery
infrastructure Feedback into discovery tools such
as the Discovery Portal Communicate