Funding British Orienteering "extras"

[Paul Frost]

There has been some recent demands for access to the data of the events database.
What is really required is an API (explanation of what an API is) so that various club and association websites can include the data within their own website. So for example I want to show Scottish event information on the SOA website and be able to integrate it within the page design and layout. Individual clubs might want to show events from nearby clubs or even their own. This could save duplicating the data input about events.

So this is one "extra" that may not be seen as a priority when funds are limited.

I started thinking about how valuable this function would be to the clubs and association sites that I manage or develop. Which lead to the thought that perhaps there is a case for these "extras" to be funded from outside of the limited budget that British Orienteering now has.

It seems that the lottery fund is plugging holes that government spending doesn't deem important enough for direct government support, so the concept exists elsewhere.

I haven't thought of any other specific job/task that might fall under this term of "extras" but I'm sure others can.

Would this be setting a dangerous precedent or is it a sensible way forward in these difficult financial times?

[Clive Coles]

I think the creation of a properly supported API is the way forward.

Web developers have never had a voice on a BOF committee or group in the same way that Fixture secretaries had. IT developments therefore have tended to support the fixture registration and recording and, at last, we seem to have something that is working well.

But webmasters have been shortchanged ~ there is still much hand crafting and duplication of effort.

I am not sure how the funding for such a development might be met. I think BOF might be more receptive to the idea if a few folk got together to define a common interface that suits the diverse requirements of club webmasters. Perhaps this thread might encourage a few suggestions as for what is needed.

[oo_wrong_way]

Would it be possible to set up a non-funded working group of willing volunteers? For this particular requirement there would be no travelling expenses to meet as those involved would/should be happy to communicate and collaborate using the Internet.

I guess there would be a need for BOF to authorise such a group to liaise directly with the BOF website developers.

[andy]

I guess there would be a need for BOF to authorise such a group to liaise directly with the BOF website developers.

Assuming BOF do actually own the code (I'd hope so, but you never know what the contract says) then it's a viable option if you can find skilled volunteers who have the time. I'd assume whoever developed the website wouldn't want any involvement in such a project without getting paid for their time so it'd likely be be without their help unless BOF were willing to pay...

[Deaf Old Gorilla]

I'd certainly support a volunteer funded API. It's too confusing for newcomers to be direct straight to the main fixture list and have to filter events, especially when they are confronted with a list with events that may be hundreds of miles away.

[SeanC]

I can't see how an API would be a no-cost option. There would have to be integration and maintenance work by the developers BOF employ and volunteers wouldn't be able to go in and tinker with that code I suspect. That would probably invalidate the warrenty assuming there is a support contract. A group of webmasters meeting up sounds like a good idea, but if it involves talking to paid staff at any point there is a cost there too. I'm not saying we (the orienteers) shouldn't be investing the money though.

Would clubs that use this service be willing to pay a small fee (say £50 - £100 per year)?

Maybe an "internet publicity group" might be a good way to help clubs exploit the internet in general as well as this narrow issue... social networking? Smartphones? etc?

[Paul Frost]

I can't see how an API would be a no-cost option. There would have to be integration and maintenance work by the developers BOF employ and volunteers wouldn't be able to go in and tinker with that code I suspect...

I suspect that there are too many issues with letting volunteers into the codebase. So that's why I'm asking how much they will charge to provide it and if "we" could/should pay for it.

Would clubs that use this service be willing to pay a small fee (say £50 - £100 per year

The club membership fee is only £46 year, so I don't think that is a small fee to pay per year for what is essentially our data. I only ask for a £22 year contribution to RouteGadget and some clubs have balked at that in the past.
I see the funding option as a one off donation towards the development costs.

I'm also keen to hear if there are other areas that people think might benefit from this sort of funding model.

[Paul Frost]

Just as an aside, but sort of connected with this thread.
Have a look at Ollie O"Brien's blog post The State of British Orienteering, in Wordles
It's an excellent example of what people can do with the data held on the British Orienteering database, it would be much easier to do this sort of thing with a proper API.

[Big Jon]

Route Gadget for £22 per year is an absolute bargain - it is one of the best self-coaching tools available (and can provide lots of entertainment as well)
Any club that doesn't use it is missing a valuable tool for rewarding club members and encouraging newcomers to come back.