{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56/events","html_url":"https://github.com/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56","id":72635693,"number":56,"title":"DATA Act and dat","user":{"login":"HerschelC","id":9831612,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/9831612?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC","html_url":"https://github.com/HerschelC","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":6,"created_at":"2015-05-02T11:53:24Z","updated_at":"2015-05-07T07:44:27Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Not really an issue, more of a connecting the dots idea for consideration.\r\n\r\nI recently read with interest: https://18f.gsa.gov/2015/04/23/the-dat-team-talks-data-streams/\r\n\r\nEssentially enablement of data mashups while maintaining data provenance.  It occurred to me that this type of system would be interesting related to DATA Act data.  External groups could append data to create a more meaningful data set.  Technically, I'm wondering how this would be handled with large volumes of data.  But conceptually, I like the idea.  It may be worth some consideration.  \r\n\r\nThis could perhaps be extended to enable crowdsourcing of data quality in some sort of feedback mechanism.  \r\n\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/comments/99757485","html_url":"https://github.com/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56#issuecomment-99757485","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/fedspendingtransparency/fedspendingtransparency.github.io/issues/56","id":99757485,"user":{"login":"HerschelC","id":9831612,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/9831612?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC","html_url":"https://github.com/HerschelC","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/HerschelC/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-05-07T07:44:27Z","updated_at":"2015-05-07T07:44:27Z","body":"Getting business stakeholders up to speed on ERDs does take a little bit of training for the audience - but so would any modeling concept.  I'm definitely not talking physical model at this point.  And by ERD, I'm talking star schema ERDs, not 3NF.  I actually refer to the model as a \"Business Information Model\"; which is essentially a logical data model, but maybe a step in the less-technical direction (e.g., focus is simplicity for business interpretation).  I prefer the BIM term because it sounds less technical.  I color code the entities/subject areas (which also ties into data governance - who's owning them at that level of the governance hierarchy).  Getting business stakeholder buy-in on the methods is always hard, but they're going to have to step up and learn as part of taking ownership of their data (versus relegating ownership to the technical people with great intentions, but lack of business domain expertise).  I also tend to always present in consumable chunks/subject areas.  Rarely would I throw an enterprise model on the screen (though they can make nice wall art). \r\n\r\nAs with everything, it's an iterative process.  I certainly wouldn't pop up a fully attributed model in the early stages.  I start with lunch-n-learn type events talking about entities and attributes then relationships – as I guess we would with any modeling intro, though I ever veer away from calling it modeling at this point.  What we’re working on, essentially embedding the use of data/information into the business, is often a change to the way many organizations operate; it requires lots of communication and baby steps.  But you absolutely must have a willing partner in the business to assume the responsibility that comes with taking ownership of their data.  Part of this is using the modern methods for talking about data.  Once they get it though, wow.  They can immediately see modeling issues (which is my personal joy - when they take over the task).  I think stars are pretty easy for stakeholders to understand so long as they want to understand.\r\n\r\nI’m really not tied to seeing any particular model format – but I would like to see a graphical depiction of the data.  Sorting through the words and between the pages on the website is a chore when a simple picture would serve the need.  I’m a little unclear on how we’d separate a front end model from back-end model, but I think that comment was in reference to a physical model (which we don’t need yet).  I’m talking essentially about what I call a BIM – a way for users to understand the data and relationships across the data; as well as possible constraints in those relationships (e.g., if dimension X isn’t related to hierarchy Y of fact Z, then we can’t report by X).  As with everything, a little something is good, doesn’t have to be the finished product.  I’d like to see these released in iterations along with the data and exchange standards.  Certainly I would hope as a way to enabling agencies to best understand these standards.  Any good data modeler will immediate start creating their own.  Would be nice to do it once and have it reused rather than creating dozens of new copies.  \r\n\r\nOne final thought with modeling and extensibility – agencies (the really smart, forward-thinking ones :) ) will use this as an opportunity to improve their financial internal reporting.  They may want to extend the model by incorporating their own data or levels of granularity.  Anything the central group (OMB/Treasury or the council) can do to created work and tools that can be leveraged is helpful, IMO.  Sharing of best practices and not re-inventing the wheel is important.\r\n"}}