[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [kDev] Developers, Project Managers
Hi Dave and All,
On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 10:33 am, Dave Cridland [Home] wrote:
1. Tools
* Profile
[snip] LDAP would be ideal for a formal directory. [snip] perhaps
ACAP's addressbook
format. Perhaps both would be for the best.
Part of the aim here is to create a highly flexible and structured
distributed data repository. Where all objects can link to other
objects via relationships. When we start building this we wont know
what all the objects and relationships will be, in fact we'll never
know until users put in their data and make connections between those
data objects.
Users need to be able to speak their own languages. That may mean that
information doesn't get picked up initially in searches. For example,
if the application you are using to search this data repository asks
for objects that match type "song" then it's going to miss out on all
the objects that are categorised as "track". It's only when some bright
spark states that the "song" type is the same as the "track" type, and
your application (or perhaps some other part of the system) recognises
that relationship, that you're going to get a more complete search.
This functionality will not be needed in the start of development as
we'll be controlling the input and output interfaces/forms. But at some
stage, as detailed at the bottom of Neil's last email:
http://www.kendra.org.uk/lists/archive/k-developers/msg00077.html
we are going to open out the whole system. So, we need to allow for
these equivalence relationships in the data model.
Essentially, the reason for this is that much of the time people don't
like to or can't talk the same language, or if they can, don't like to
or can't describe things using the same terminology. I want the system
to be able to cope with this and allow people to talk exactly the way
they want to. If their data doesn't get picked up then the-way-it-is.
At some point they'll change how they tag the information or someone
will set up an equivalence relationship.
Initially I want to have our own web front end for the system. Reason
1: WE HAVE TO KEEP THINGS SIMPLE FOR THE END USER. Check out the
Profile page on Kendra. Everything is in there - even subbing and
unsubbing from Majordumo. Reason 2: The formats/protocols you mention,
as I understand it, don't allow for those deep relationships that we
want to set up between objects. At the edges of the Kendra cloud we
will need to talk other languages so, exporting to, importing from and
generally interfacing with: LDAP, ACAP, vCard, iCal, CAP, RSS, etc is
going to be important but more likely at a later stage.
Initially we could base our input/output templates on the
formats/protocols you mention but the underlying data structure should
be flexible enough to go far beyond them.
* Forum
Some form of MLM
Multilevel Marketing? Explain yourself sir! ;-) Better to expand
acronyms in future and even more helpful to provide URLs.
or (my personal choice) to publically available IMAP mailboxes, with a
sane web front end.
Yes, I like that. The important thing is to provide a range of ways for
people to communicate. Bulletin boards are great but mostly lack the
ease of just replying to an email.
* Funding
Not entirely sure I follow what this means in terms of technical
requirements.
Users need to be able to list funding orgs on the website. We then need
to be able to encourage users to apply for funding for their respective
Kendra related projects from these funding projects. Not sure how this
will exactly work yet in terms of functionality...
* Accounts
GL system
What's that?!?!?
this should just be a matter of sticking some Excel (or whatever)
files up.
I want to be able to have the accounts listed on the website and then
for users to be able to comment on a particular item, and I guess that
automatically creates a forum topic.
* Events And Meetings
Rated by whom? What criteria?
By people specified by the website owner (me). Initially I'd leave it
open to every registered Kendra Participant (apart from the one that
enters the event!) and hopefully it will stay that way. Criteria is
that it's an event that Kendra users think is relevant to the Kendra
project.
* Development
In what sense?
I'm not exactly sure. We need a place where code can get developed
collaboratively, don't we?
We could run our own Sourceforge, of course, and most
likely combine this with some form of PM software - there's
http://core-lan-org.sf.net/ which I've been involved with in the past,
and seems to be well regarded as a simple PM system that covers the
basics well.
Cool.
So instead, I'm thinking that, while anyone could enter metadata that
they considered right (or indeed deliberately wrong), those reading the
metadata could equally well rate it. Rating ratings is even possible.
Yes, exactly, and we need this pervasively throughout the system.
Cheers Daniel