[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [chairs] DocBook TC position on Kavi
Philpott, Robert wrote: >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. > +1 for wsrm tc Tom Rutt > > >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 >> >> > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]