OHS Project ,
the unfinished revolution

June 22, 2000
previous meeting, next meeting. 1

Agenda: 2

  1. Announcements and New Business. 
    1. Rescheduling next meeting to accomodate Doug's Cadence presentation. 
    2. Scheduling a 1968 Demo viewing party. 
    3. Eric: Report from JavaOne; free demo tool. 
  2. Use Cases. 
  3. Matching requirements with Use Cases. 
  4. Architectural/Design issues. 2A

Present: 3

Armstrong, Eric - TreeLight
Busick, Armando - Freelance Consulting/Design
Coppernoll, Mary - Bootstrap Institute
Iverson, Lee - SRI International
Kim, Eugene - Freelance Writer/Consultant
Laderoute, Keith - SRI International
Lincoln, Brian -
Lincoln, Pat - SRI International
Liu, Howard - VerticalNet
McGeorge, Liberty - Freelance Consulting/Design
Park, Jack - VerticalNet
Williams, Joe - Williams Publications
Yee, Su-Ling - MilleniumProject/BI Intern . 3A

Minutes: 4

1. Action items decided:

  • Su-Ling will send out URL to Doug's 1968 demo video. 
  • Pat will prepare a summary about the Washington trip. 4A
2. Agenda:
  • Announcements 
  • News: JavaOne Highlights, Doug's Washington visit 
  • Use Cases 4B
3. Announcements:
  • Welcome Brian Lincoln, Libby McGeorge, Armando Busick. 
  • Tuesday, June 27, 2000, is date for next meeting, or perhaps Monday, Jun. 28, 2000 
  • Doug's 1968 demo tape viewing party is canceled. Weekly loan is available. Video is also available online. Action Item: Su-Ling will send out URL. 4C
4. Eric presents highlights from JavaOne. 4D

Eric is convinced that Java is the way to go for our project. It might make sense to go to a Python convention. Lee advised that we be careful not to compromise interoperability with nonJava platforms. Eugene said we need to talk about language choice. 4D1

Eric liked ViewletBuilder2, by a company called Qarbon, an interactive demoware, i.e. an interactive tutorial builder. 4D2

Eric also noted a collaboration engine, by CrystalGate, contact person Eric Jones, that allows for real-time collaboration for Windows programs. Integrating the collaboration engine into your Windows program will allow multiple users to use the program simultaneously. Eric suggested inviting Jones to a future meeting. 4D3

Also, Eric mentioned the Pluglets API, by Netscape. They provide a standard platform, run on local Java Virtual Machine, for extending browser capability, in order to overcome interoperability problems. 4D4

Eric mentioned WebStart, an application server from Sun. 4D5

5. Pat and Doug at Washington with Software Consortium. Discussed things with ARPA's WebHabitatproject, a potential funding source. It's a long process to obtain funding from them. Timing is the issue. Pat felt it was somewhat disappointing. Action Item: Summary is in order, by Pat. 4E

6. Eugene hasn't registered the OHS project on SourceForge. SourceForge requires that we have an Open Source license, and we haven't chosen one yet. Reminds us about our July 6 deadline for choosing a license. 4F

7. Use Cases. 4G

Eugene has seven basic use cases for the system, and they are highly general. Among other things, the use cases are about linking, browsing, and commenting a document. We'll go through a high-level use case. We'll map our system requirement into the use cases. 4G1

Looked at Use Case "Develop document." Reaching consensus and relating documentation to code are common open source problems. Based on our discussions with Brian Behlendorf, our goal should be to fill those gaps, said Lee. 4G2

The OHS system will support UML diagram collaboration, since a UML document can be expressed an XML document, as described by the XMI DTD. (Cf. ArgoUML.) The use cases should address multiple writers of a doc, said Lee. 4G3

Eugene asked, do we want to manage IBIS style documents in the 1st cut? IBIS is not the only option. IBIS style discussion is a way for summarizing issues and allow people to vote on it. 4G4

Eugene asserted that linking to other documents is a basic feature of OHS, and that we need categories. Lee noted how IBIS fits here. The user should be able to discuss a given node. The user should be able to isolate the section of the document, and initiate an IBIS style discussion of this, and lead to a change of the original document. Either the IBIS discussion is a separate document that refers to a given node as origin -- hence no need to categorize the node -- or IBIS discussion can be part of the original namespace. Joe suggested that the user may want to view document without the comments. 4G5

Eric observed that an outliner would support many views. It can determine what view to present the user when the user arrives at the node. Lee suggested visiting the Silicon Graphics documentation website for reference. There, one can expand the table of contents. A CGI argument determines the viewing parameter for the document. 4G6

Eric stated that the system definitely needs categorization of nodes. Eric expressed the need to distinguish between document and its views (i.e. links to comment, etc). 4G7

Someone asked, what's IBIS? Issue-based Information System. 4G8

Eugene illustrated an idea. Suppose someone sends email. Links are made by humans or system. Summarizing is hierarchical; discussion is anarchical. 4G9

Eugene asked, is a view a document? What is a document? Long discussion ensued. At the end, agreed that further discussion should continue on the mailing list. 4G10




Above space serves to put hyperlinked targets at the top of the window
Copyright 2000 Bootstrap Institute. All rights reserved.