permitdata.org
permitdata.org copied to clipboard
open-data-standards
Proposal to merge with openpermit.org
We have been working for a while on a spec along the same lines as permitdata.org at openpermit.org. So far we have focused more on operational data rather than just static data with the goal of standardizing epermitting systems from multiple jurisdictions. There is a lot of interest in the South Florida region and Code for Miami and Miami-Dade County have also been involved in the discussions with more partners to come.
So far we have focused mostly on the API contract side of things and permit requirements. We were going to start looking into the actual data formats to return from our permit APIs next. As it turns out, permitdata.org is very complementary to what we are doing and we see it counter productive to have two separate communities and specifications.
Mark and I have already discussed and agreed, so I propose to start discussions to merge these two specifications into one that has data schemas and delivery formats.
Delivery formats being possibly as both some derivative of our API definitions and maybe some CSV format. As our API covers some transactional (POST) methods and other additional items, Mark suggested that those be labeled optional in the final spec and only the methods that match the data definitions in permitdata.org should be required.
We are also working on a reference implementation for jurisdictions to quickly get the spec running alongside their permitting systems and client libraries for the APIs. These will be Open for contributions soon.
We would like feedback, comment and suggestions on this topics.
@mmartin78 I've started to work on an API for accessing data in BLDS format - borrows very heavily from the work you've done on openpermit.org. Very early days right now on this, but you can see what I've got so far here.
Would appreciate any thoughts, issues, suggestions, etc. Looking forward to chatting more with you on this soon.
@mmartin78 @mheadd I love this idea, and I'm really hoping to see a sustainable standard come out of this. I'm hoping to encourage municipalities here in Massachusetts to use a standard, let me know if there are ways I might be able to help.
@mikehamel Awesome to hear!
There may be a way that you can help, if you have time and are interested. There are municipalities in Mass. that already issue building permit data that can (possibly) be mapped to this standard. This might be a good first step in showing them that the effort required to convert their existing building permit data to this standard is not all that hard.
For example, here is the City of Boston's existing building permit data set. Would you want to take a crack at doing a field mapping between what Boston has already published and the proposed data spec?
Happy to connect by phone or direct email to discuss further if you are interested and want to chat more.
Hi all – we have already taken a crack at transforming Boston into the new standard. Will post soon.
Thanks,
Aditya
From: Mark Headd [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 6:03 AM To: open-data-standards/permitdata.org Subject: Re: [permitdata.org] Proposal to merge with openpermit.org (#14)
@mikehamel https://github.com/mikehamel Awesome to hear!
There may be a way that you can help, if you have time and are interested. There are municipalities in Mass. that already issue building permit data that can (possibly) be mapped to this standard. This might be a good first step in showing them that the effort required to convert their existing building permit data to this standard is not all that hard.
For example, here is the City of Boston's existing building permit data set https://data.cityofboston.gov/Permitting/Approved-Building-Permits/msk6-43c6. Would you want to take a crack at doing a field mapping between what Boston has already published and the proposed data spec?
Happy to connect by phone or direct email to discuss further if you are interested and want to chat more.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/open-data-standards/permitdata.org/issues/14#issuecomment-96642611 .
@mheadd I like what you have done with your API implementation. You have added some new APIs that we do not have. If you have the chance please open some issues for us to add those at https://github.com/openpermit/openpermit.github.io/issues
This code is at very early stage, but it could become a reference implementation for node.js. My only suggestion is to make it plugable so it can become a reference implementation, the API.js directly calls CKAN interface hard coded to civicdata.com. I would add a layer of indirection and plugin system so that multiple "backends" can be loaded from configuration. This will allow users to setup the code as is on a server, implement a small "backend" layer to integrate to their data repository if one does not exist already, configure the server with that "backend" and be ready to go. We will be releasing our reference implementation for .NET soon which follows this pattern.
@mmartin78 - 100% agree on making the connection to various backends configurable. Code is in the early stages - an issue for this has now been created, and I can add documentation for how to add a new module for a different datasource.