Forum OpenACS CMS: Feature List

Collapse
Posted by Mark Aufflick on

I worked on a bullet point user feature list last night, based on the CR functionality.

It's pretty rough ansd has a few blanks, but can I suggest we discuss it in this forum thread as a precusor to editing the list?

link here

As per the description of this page:

First draft of the required user features of the new CMS. When finished and agreed on, this list can be used to build a click-through mockup, and design the tcl apis required by the ui.

Collapse
2: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Jun Yamog on
Hi Mark,

Thanks for putting this one.  Some comments:

- pdf and word can be treated similarly.  as in binary content.  We do have to check if we can convert them via inso filters.

- isn't inso filters oracle specific?

- "Every edit creates a new content revision" may not be that good.  This was what I did with modETP, it turns out you will get so many revisions in a single page.  The UI that I did for the client that used bcms.  You can edit the a page over and over, and you will have to say that I want a new version.  Of course there is a drawback that you will not track the all changes.

- regarding the parent and child stuff.  It easy to get and render it.  What is hard is putting inline content with an article.  We can use href, but then that is prone to 404.  I was thinking of implementing a tag.  Say cms id="123" for inline stuff.  Take note that this is a different issue for say article template with inline pictures, where in the inline picture is in the template and not in the content.

Collapse
3: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Mark Aufflick on
The inserting inline is pretty easy - like you say we just make up a new tag - what is tricky (or will require thinking due to the infinate ways it could be handled) is how these parts will be handled in the ui.

You are right that inso is Oracle specific - we can use vwWare: http://wvware.sourceforge.net/ for word documents and pdftohtml: http://pdftohtml.sourceforge.net/ for pdfs. I am sure we can find other tools for excel etc.

Collapse
4: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Mark Aufflick on
I have a feeling that the option to make a revision or not is pragmatic, especially given our not-so-scalable unified revision table, but I think forcing revisions really gives value to users who are not used to thinking of revisions. Even if only for backup puposes "If it only saves you once this year, it's been a GoodYear (TM)"
Collapse
5: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Dave Bauer on
Mark, please run Tidy http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/ on your word doc and replace the code in the features list, I can't edit it or comment the way it is :)

To support convertion/cleanup, we should not restrict to one way, ie: inso filters, but support a service contract that can take input in one format, and produce output in another. This way you could use an external utility, and the CMS would not be aware of the implementation.

For file upload, the CMS can easily allow parameters for items such as, uploaded file storage, filesystem or database, the CR provides a way to access the content without worrying about where it is.

If we accept utpload of complete HTML docs, at least we sohuld extract the HTML title to use as the content revision title. There are also meta tags for author etc, that could be extracted if they exist.

The decision if revisions should go live immediatlye should not be made for hte user. It can be a package wide parameter, or like lars-blogger, ask the content editor, with the default set by the parameter. It is easy enough to offer this level of flexibility.

Do we have any real analysis that storing edits in the cr_revisions table will not scale? Has anyone tested this?

FOr folders, I think per-subsite is the best way to manage it. That is, each subsite has a cms root folder.

More later.

Collapse
6: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by David Kuczek on
I'm not sure if this has been metioned before, but what I would like to see in the new CMS is subsite abilities.

I think about something similar to the oacs 3.2.5 homepage module, where every user could create his own homepage whithin the installation and publish it under a certain url.

It would be great if a user could say: I would like to use your full featured CMS to create and manage my private pages and folder structures. Additionally I would like to use your templating system to make it easier to streamline or change the appearance of my pages. On top I could enhance my "new homepage" with other oacs modules like forums or news etc.

By the way: Some days ago I heard about Yahoo's SiteBuilder... http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/

Maybe they have interesting new features or templates that we could use somehow...

Collapse
7: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Dave Bauer on
David,

I don't see any reason your application wouldn't "just work" with the CMS plans we have.

Basically each homepage would be a folder. The user who owns the homepage would be given write permission on the folder and could add content items and folders inside that folder.

We could add some prebuilt styles and templates.

Any package I work on will be subsite-enabled, so that each subsite can have a distinct instance of that package.

Collapse
8: Re: Feature List (response to 6)
Posted by xx xx on
David,
do you still have the 'oacs 3.2.5 homepage module'? Is there a place where I can download it and maybe even a place where I can see how it works?
Collapse
9: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Don Baccus on
There's no evidence that revisions per se don't scale, this is continously asserted without data to support the assertion.

In a traditional CMS, which is article-oriented, revisions are relatively few and editors and authors will want an audit trail (remember the requirement for an audit trail drove the decision to provide revisions, this decision wasn't made by aD in a vacuum)

ETP is used more as a page builder rather than a scheduled article builder and it seems obvious that over time lots of revisions might build up.

Collapse
11: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by David Kuczek on
Hey Dave, that's great to hear. The new CMS effort looks very promising! Thumbs up!

Hey Aldert, you can find the source code here:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/acs-pg/acs3-pg/www/homepage/

Collapse
12: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by David Kuczek on
Hey Jun and Mark,

it would be great to integrate openoffice (http://www.openoffice.org/) as a converter for documents. It can convert alomst anything to everything and the conversion filters are being constantly improved as you can see on their mailing lists...

Collapse
13: Re: Feature List (response to 12)
Posted by Dirk Gomez on
The wvConv tools do a reasonably fine job with converting WinWord files. I'd rather use them and clean up the resulting files with tidy. OpenOffice seems fairly heavy-weight.
Collapse
10: Re: Feature List (response to 1)
Posted by Carl Robert Blesius on
A subsite aware CMS is what I want to see as well David. This way each little publishing community can take advantage of OpenACS packages (ticket tracker, time logger, publication forum, etc.) as they prepare and revise content for publication. An option that allows a user to render content to the file system would be nice too. That way we have reliability (pages get served even if the DB connection goes on vacation), scalability (AOLServer can do what it is good at), portability (there is always a hard copy of content that can be moved to whatever platform is in style) and we can use stuff like the static pages package.