Thank you.
As much as I've appreciated a lot of the vision and the recommendations on where the federal government can better provide data and make it more accessible to the general public, I think the purpose of the open data project was to put it to the developers and anyone else out there to get in on it so that it's not driven just by the federal government. So while I think a lot of the recommendations are valuable, and we need to consider.... Well, let me put it another way. We shouldn't be abdicating our own responsibility to provide better data just because we have open data. Just because we are inviting developers and other people in on it doesn't mean that we're done having to provide context, as has been put.
But one of the challenges in the context of the open data project is that we don't want the government itself to put too much context in the data for the open data project. Maybe we want to put context in for other things, but with the open data project itself, by putting context on it we're eliminating a whole bunch of ideas that may have come up without providing the context.
That brings me to a question out of Mr. McKerlie's presentation. You said that you wanted to make sure you're pursuing a “quality over quantity” approach. Is that true just for the kind of data that the government wants to provide, or is it true in the open data context? If it is, I wonder why that would be. Why not have quantity now, which can be followed up as we go with quality, so that we don't have to wait for the quality to get people's hands on this stuff? Maybe they can help us provide the quality.