If data standards are such a good and natural thing – an enabler and an asset that benefit everyone who uses them – how come they don't just emerge by themselves? The answer is that evolution is blind. Stuff happens, and then other stuff happens. There's no benevolent guiding hand making sure events turn out the way we want them. The data landscape we inherit is a patchwork of isolated solutions. It's not a planned economy.
The case for data standards pretty much writes itself. Anyone who thinks about the value of data from a non-local perspective will quickly see it makes no sense to have different formats and semantics for the same items. But seeing the obvious isn't the same thing as making it happen. We need to promote the incredible value of joined-up data.
Bill Anderson is on this path in a recent blog post. I think those of us who know standards are the answer must never forget to highlight the questions they are the answer to. It's the questions which motivate action. Anderson's example is the need to know how many women around the world die in childbirth. It's incredible we don't know this. Data standards would enable us to collect more data, analyze patterns, and relate outcomes to practices. Physicians around the world would save more lives.
The Irish statesman Edmund Burke said: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Those of us who understand data standards, and how to apply them, can be a force for good. Open Data
Comments