When a dataset doesn’t qualify for the Open Data Index because it doesn’t comply with one or more criteria, it’s understandably not included in the Index. However, all the research that went into it (e.g. why doesn’t it qualify, URLs, etc.) is valuable and would save a lot of time for the next years’ census if it was archived somehow. It could then be re-evaluated more easily and test the criteria again much more quickly than if contributors have to look it all up again.
To implement this, perhaps there should be a question on the submission form asking whether or not the dataset meets the qualifying criteria. This question and the dataset would then be omitted on the final Open Data Index results, but would be stored in the database and shown to contributors on the next year in order to make the research easier and contributions quicker.
I think this can be achieved at present - even if you say the data does not exist, you can add comments explaining everywhere you looked so people can see the effort you made and it is there for future reference.
I haven’t seen the words “qualifying criteria” and perhaps your interpretation of the dataset definition is stricter than mine (if it exists in part, I add it with comments).
Adding a “does this dataset fully meet the qualifying criteria/dataset definition” question is an interesting idea. It would add more accuracy to the scoring and I suspect require more research to ensure that the dataset definitions are realistic and practical.
+1 to Stephen.
In my dreams, the application will include check boxes that will allow users to mark which of the criteria are relevant to the datasets they found. Since we don’t have this feature, these are guidelines. @herrmann please submit all the data you have and as @stephen mentioned, please add as much information as you can in the comment section, this way, the reviewer can understand what you did and can decide if the dataset fit the criteria or not.
Also, tagging @rufus on this thread as well so he will see it.