Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updated README to reflect new project direction #5

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Updated README to reflect new project direction #5

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

jpvelez
Copy link

@jpvelez jpvelez commented Feb 17, 2014

No description provided.

@daguar
Copy link

daguar commented Feb 17, 2014

👍 Thanks! Was just about to do a similar PR. 😺

@noneck
Copy link
Member

noneck commented Feb 20, 2014

have we come to a point where we have outlined the file standard?

in the meantime, Civic.JSON describes what BetaNYC is using to power our projects.betaNYC.us.

@jpvelez
Copy link
Author

jpvelez commented Feb 20, 2014

No, we need to start the convo by creating a few issues- Juan-Pablo Velez
312-218-5448
[email protected]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Noel Hidalgo [email protected]
wrote:

have we come to a point where we have outlined the file standard?

in the meantime, Civic.JSON describes what BetaNYC is using to power our projects.betaNYC.us.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#5 (comment)

@daguar
Copy link

daguar commented Feb 23, 2014

@noneck -- The working version of the file standard that is being implemented in CfA's "civic-json-worker" cross-municipality app is outlined by @ondrae here:
codeforamerica/cfapi#14 (comment)

I do think Juan's pull request is on-point. My understanding was that this repo would be the place for discussion of the data standard, and that repo would be discussing implementation of an "aggregator" API.

But if you're thinking this BetaNYC repo should preserve what yous guys are doing, we could potentially:

  1. Discuss the data standard over there (ie at https://github.com/codeforamerica/civic-json-worker )
  2. Fork civic.json to CfA's repo and work on the broader data standard going beyond BetaNYC in that area

Bottom line, though, to me is that right now the proliferation of things here makes understanding the state of play kinda difficult. So if Juan's PR isn't cool at this point, I'd still minimally like to see a ref in the README pointing at CfA's civic-json-worker page as the place to contribute and hash out the inter-municipality data standard.

@jpmckinney
Copy link

Why is there a project_needs field within the sample GitHub JSON? I'm not aware of GitHub offering that field.

@noneck
Copy link
Member

noneck commented Feb 26, 2014

Dave,

I'm sorry. Does that standard comply to schema.org standards?

Maybe you can propose better language?

N

Sent from my TI–85

On 23 Feb 2014, at 12:21, Dave Guarino [email protected] wrote:

@noneck -- The working version of the file standard that is being implemented in CfA's "civic-json-worker" cross-municipality app is outlined by @ondrae here:
codeforamerica/cfapi#14 (comment)

I do think Juan's pull request is on-point. My understanding was that this repo would be the place for discussion of the data standard, and that repo would be discussing implementation of an "aggregator" API.

But if you're thinking this BetaNYC repo should preserve what yous guys are doing, we could potentially:

Discuss the data standard over there (ie at https://github.com/codeforamerica/civic-json-worker )
Fork civic.json to CfA's repo and work on the broader data standard going beyond BetaNYC in that area
Bottom line, though, to me is that right now the proliferation of things here makes understanding the state of play kinda difficult. So if Juan's PR isn't kosher at this point, I'd still minimally like to see a ref in the README pointing at CfA's civic-json-worker page as the place to contribute and hash out the inter-municipality data standard.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@daguar
Copy link

daguar commented Feb 26, 2014

@noneck -- civic-json-worker isn't my project. Could you bring up this issue over on that repo if you think it merits changing the implementation?

I opened an issue for that here: codeforamerica/cfapi#21

@ondrae
Copy link

ondrae commented Feb 26, 2014

Commented on #6 to show an example with all of our various attributes included. Lets start pruning them down there.

@migurski
Copy link

@jpmckinney, project_needs pulls out issues labeled in a way that suggests external help is welcome. We’re thinking forward to an automatic but still intentional way to surface possible opportunities for help.

@jszwedko
Copy link

Sorry to bump a dead issue, but is the format documented in the PR the recommended format for civic.json files?

@ondrae
Copy link

ondrae commented Feb 15, 2016

Hey @jszwedko. The most up to date civic.json stuff is either Code for DC's at http://open.dc.gov/civic.json/builder.html or Code for America's at https://github.com/codeforamerica/brigade/blob/master/README-Project-Search.md#civicjson.

The Code for America Project Search uses the status and tags attributes from the civic.json.

@jszwedko
Copy link

@ondrae thanks for the pointers 👏

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants