Dataset Versioning


Stage: Active

Campaign: Strategic Intent

Perhaps it's there and I don't see it, but it would seem that some kind of automated versioning system needs to be in place. My concern, from a transparency standpoint, would be if there is the capability to overwrite an existing dataset. Even if it is well intentioned, if the original dataset is not preserved, questions could arise as to what has been changed/added/removed.

This could also help with datasets that change over time. Rather than having numerous "Year 200x" versions, an automated version system could handle this much cleaner.


Submitted by

Feedback Score

28 votes

Idea Details

Vote Activity (latest 20 votes)

  1. Agreed
  2. Agreed
  3. Agreed
  4. Agreed
  5. Agreed
  6. Agreed
  7. Agreed
  8. Agreed
  9. Agreed
  10. Agreed
  11. Agreed
  12. Agreed
  13. Agreed
  14. Agreed
  15. Agreed
  16. Agreed
  17. Agreed
  18. Agreed
  19. Agreed
  20. Agreed
(latest 20 votes)

Similar Ideas [ 4 ]


  1. Comment

    If I read correctly: Agreed. A history of some sort for each particular. This would be a protection from future abuse (or mistakes, as suggested), which should be an important thing to factor in, given term limits and the natural progression of time. Future generations might be aided greatly by a bit of this foresight.

  2. Comment

    Is data supposed to be preserved under federal law for archiving purposes? Does this serve to preserve versions per this suggestion?

Add your comment