[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [chairs] DocBook TC position on Kavi
Hi Karl - I would like to comment that Norm's concerns have also been discussed many times among the co-chairs, editors, secretary, and web site maintainer of the SSTC as well. Norm's memo reads as though it almost could have been written by us. I agree with Norm that real urgency needs to be placed on addressing them. Thanks for listening... Rob Philpott RSA Security Inc. The Most Trusted Name in e-Security Tel: 781-515-7115 Mobile: 617-510-0893 Fax: 781-515-7020 mailto:rphilpott@rsasecurity.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Norman Walsh [mailto:ndw@nwalsh.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:55 PM > To: Karl Best; chairs@lists.oasis-open.org > Cc: docbook-tc@lists.oasis-open.org; patrick.gannon@oasis-open.org > Subject: [chairs] DocBook TC position on Kavi > > [I appreciate that this message comes a few days after the publication > of a set of requirements for a document repository. Nevertheless, the > DocBook TC felt that it would be useful and appropriate to report the > position that we have been developing for a month or so.] > > The DocBook Technical Committee would like to express its continued > frustration with the document management part of the Kavi system > implemented at OASIS. We find the system to be technically inadequate > at best and flatly broken at worst. Beyond the technical issues, we > are concerned that it is an awkward, difficult to use system and > consequently we fear that it may be driving users away from OASIS. > This is not only bad for our committee, it is bad for the consortium > as a whole. > > It is our unanimous opinion that the Kavi system as currently > implemented has critical flaws, and that it is imperative that they be > corrected. We are aware that some of these issues have been brought to > your attention before by individuals, but we would like to reiterate > them here as part of our committee position. > > We draw your attention to the following technical issues. > > 1. The document repository is simply broken. Although chairs and > secretaries can organize documents into a hierarchy, this hierarchy > is not exposed to the general public. This frustrates any attempt > that the committee might make to organize the documents for the > public. > > 2. The Kavi system forces documents to have automatically generated > URIs that are meaningless and difficult to remember. Even if we > were able to accept the URIs generated, it is impossible to predict > the URI that will be assigned to a document when it is placed in > the repository. This makes it impossible for the committee to > decide offline, for example at a face-to-face meeting, where and > how documents will be published. > > 3. Another consequence of the fact that URIs are generated by the > system rather than assigned by the committee with responsibility > for the material is that it is impossible to publish specifications > that contain internal cross references. An HTML version of a > specification, for example, cannot contain a link to the PDF > version. > > 4. This also makes it impossible to publish a web of documents. A > large document could not be broken into chapters, for example, with > navigational links between the chapters. > > 5. It follows further that the DocBook Committee *cannot* publish the > DocBook DTD on the OASIS site. DocBook is a modular DTD and the > URIs of the modules must be predictable. In fact, as a general > rule, it would seem that no Technical Committee can publish any > schema, stylesheet, or other work product of any reasonable > complexity on the OASIS site other than as a zip package or > something similar for the user to download and install locally. > > 6. The OASIS email system is unable to deal with properly formatted > MIME messages. It simply discards their contents and forwards a blank > message to the list. This is causing considerable frustration and > wasted > effort. We observe also that several individuals have approached the > committee to express frustration with the mailing list software. > This situation is inhibiting communications within OASIS TCs thereby > slowing down work by its members. > > 7. The design of the OASIS web server is insufficient for the needs of > the DocBook Technical Committee. Before the migration to Kavi, the > DocBook TC maintained an area of web space on the server containing > almost 4,000 individual pages. No member of the public can be > expected to navigate a web space of that size without some > navigation system for the pages that are in the space, but the Kavi > design offers no mechanism for such an information architecture. > > In addition to solving these technical issues, we feel that OASIS > should give serious consideration to the overall design of the site. > > We are concerned that the current design frustrates users ability to > quickly and conveniently find the information that they need. (Try, > for example, to find XML Catalogs Committee Specification or the > minutes of the second UBL meeting) > > This frustration, we fear, will make them less likely to return to the > OASIS site thereby diminishing the organizations important role in the > industry. Several TC members have already noticed this effect on > themselves or others in their organizations. > > We recognize that technical committees have many different needs. Kavi > provides facilities for electronic balloting, membership maintenance, > and meeting scheduling that are valuable. But it is demonstrably > inadequate in some very key ways: in the presentation of committee > work products, in the publication of schemas and other ancillary > materials, in the design and organization of technical committee web > sites, and in its inability to provide reasonable looking public URIs. > > We close with the simple observation that these issues, both the > technical and non-technical, are driving committees to establish > entirely independent web sites in order to better serve their user > communities. It would seem clear that OASIS must re-prioritize some > staff duties and ensure that immediate, dramatic action is taken if it > wishes to reverse this trend. > > Sincerely, > > Norman Walsh, > For the DocBook Technical Committee[1] > > [1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-tc/200402/msg00012.html
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]