The key paragraphs seem to me to be p33-34, where the commissioner argues that the structure of the file leading to the same printed page is unimportant, because it is not intended to be part of the document.
I think it's clearly possible to argue in certain cases that this is an inappropriate assertion. For example, one may wish to FOI and audit the spreadsheets at the centre of the West Coast Mainline scandal (although they're probably commercially sensitive, of course.) There's a huge - and invisible! - difference between a cell containing an equation which *calculates* £1.2m through a complex formula (or even a sum) and a cell which merely contains the *number* £1.2m. Likewise, Excel allows you to hide intermediary calculations away - hidden rows and columns, hidden worksheets, that don't get sent to the printer. These calculations - or notes in cells, or many other features of an electronic document - won't appear in the scan/printout and aren't reconstructable by any means (unlike OCR and layout analysis for your average Word document.) Here's a link to a news story about it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/oct/05/west-coast-civil-servant-transport (Of vague interest whilst on the topic - spreadsheet horror stories! http://www.eusprig.org/horror-stories.htm) Dave. On 8 January 2013 22:27, Ganesh Sittampalam <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > For a while I've been pursuing a test Freedom of Information request > designed to establish that a full electronic copy of a document is > requestable under the FOI Act. > > The main idea is to get away from the horrible scanned printouts that so > many authorities use for releasing information, though also I expect > that complete copies may contain useful/interesting information about > history, authorship etc. > > My request has now reached the stage of an ICO decision notice ruling > against me, and I will be appealing to the Information Tribunal[1]. I > have some experience of bringing Tribunal cases, but I'm keen to ensure > that this case is argued as thoroughly as possible as I'm aiming to set > a useful precedent[2]. > > I'm therefore looking for any suggestions or advice that anyone can > offer, in terms of arguments I can make, technical details that would > help my case, etc. Any counter-arguments to my position are also > welcome, if only so I can develop a response :-) > > Depending on how I end up approaching the case and the nature of the > Commissioner's case in opposition, it might also be helpful to have an > expert witness to give technical evidence, though it's also possible > that I could do that myself. > > The essence of my argument is that the raw bytes of a document, stored > on a computer disk, are information which is subject to disclosure in > the normal way; whereas the ICO claim that the raw bytes are just the > format of the document and aren't disclosable. > > The history of the case is probably best summed up by the decision > notice itself: > > http://www.comply-promptly.org.uk/raw-bytes/fs50448720.pdf > > The entire WDTK thread with the request is here: > > http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/cookies_on_the_icos_site > > The actual topic of the request isn't particularly important - I was > just piggybacking this idea on a request I wanted to make anyway (the > ICO is also the target of my request, as well as being the regulator > issuing the decision notice). > > I'll need to submit my appeal by 28 days from today (i.e. very early > February), but I can develop my case in further submissions. > > Cheers, > > Ganesh > > > [1] Technically the "First-tier tribunal (Information Rights)" > > [2] First-tier tribunal cases don't actually set binding precedents, but > it would certainly be persuasive, and the case could potentially end up > in the Upper Tribunal which does set such precedents. > > _______________________________________________ > developers-public mailing list > [email protected] > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public > > Unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/dave.mckee%40gmail.com >
_______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
