History for OrganizationObjectsPrelim
??changed:
-
*This is a preliminary stab at an Organization Objects proposal - see
OrganizationObjectsProposal for the actual proposal.
This document may help illuminate, so i'm keeping it
around. klm, May 28, 2001, original draft Feb 15, 2001*
I propose a general facility for maintaining various kinds of
associations between collections of content objects, with the
associations represented in objects separate from the content
containers. This would complement general content with reusable
organization and process features across applications.
Goal
The goal is to make it easy to impart the features of various
organizational schemes to any suitable content, and in particular,
enable the same content to participate in different organizational
relationships within different contexts.
For example, rather than having to choose to stick your content in
either a wiki or a weblog or a maillist archive or an issue
tracker, any and all of these applications will be contexts within
shared content can be accessed, according to the application
context's particular organizational perspectives.
Background / Purpose
My work has turned out to focus on collaboration-structuring
applications - list management (mailman), issue tracking
(tracker, collector), wiki (!WikiForNow), and so forth. For each application,
i wound up working with a new content type developed from scratch,
and wound up with a content, organizational, and procedural
framework that i could not reuse across applications.
I see the PTK/CMF as being an antidote to this - reusable content
that i can plug into new applications. One missing piece is
general provision for, as paul liked to call it, "the space
between content" - general, reusable ways to express content
organization. This is where the organization object comes in.
Proposal
This is a proposal of a kind of object for capturing various kinds
of organizational associations between arbitrary content objects,
such that any content object (and other organizations) can be
involved in the organizations, and such that any content object
can be involved in numerous organizations.
Compined with content management framework features like finite
state machines and membership, these objects should support
arbitrary content as part of calender event management, issue
tracking, and other structured collaboration systems. This
combination of faculties should also provide for intricately
structured, conditioned navigation of content, as in training
and troubleshooting systems, and adventure/exploration worlds. !
Some Representative/Central Types of Organization Objects
Organization objects would keep track of associations for
collections of content items, including things like:
- Interlinking info - forward and backlinks, (and maybe change
records, for forwarding of outdated references)
- Lineage/thread - contains/is-contained-by, replies/in-reply-to,
sibling
- Path - next/previous, audit, and other sequences through
other organizations
- Modification time - RecentChanges type info
*Instead, "Events" - eg, provenance, revision, offspring,
security changes, licensing/publication, etc. Then, eg recent
changes can provide discrimination about type of event, and
we can use the information to, eg, see the publication
history of an object, the germination of other pages from
it, etc.*
*See
"http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/harmony/docs/abc/abc_draft.html",
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/harmony/docs/abc/abc_draft.html
and
"http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/lagoze_paper.htm",
http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/lagoze_paper.htm .*
- Dependency - "depends-on" / "dependents"
- Ranking - ratings relative to other items in the collection
- Audit - traversal incidence statistics, for tracking
referrers and referrals
(Cataloged !DublinCore metadata already provides for organization
according to standard classifications like author (creator).)
How
There are a few reasons for the content and the organization
objects to be loosly coupled.
- Loose coupling serves the essential vision of organization
information as a service available to any content objects - so
that organizational mechanisms are reusable, with any kind of
content where it may obtain.
- Multiple organizational features will probably apply to any
single piece of content at the same time, with potentially
redundant analysis of the change that would be better
implemented once in a third-party monitoring pattern.
- Loose coupling also serves deploying content in the context of
more than one organization. For instance, some technical
tidbit may be relevant in reference manual, book/story
manuscript, executive-presentation slide, and/or user guide
perspectives. New-media wise, some discussion contribution
may be visible in both weblog and wiki views on a topic - and
it may pertain to multiple topics.
At the same time, organization objects do need to be maintain
close tracking of changes to content.
To achieve all this, organization objects would be implemented
as services which track their subject content via monitoring of
actions in relevant *event channel* notifications. Each
organization object type would have a characteristic interface
signature, and be available for consultation via a Zope *service
discovery* mechanism.
A convenient example would be tracking of the linking,
modification time, and parenting/lineage relationships in
current ZWiki using organization objects which watch the event
channel for content changes within the wiki namespace container
(currently, a folder - this sort of containment may well be
delineated in other, higher-level ways as we move forward). A
weblog perspective would use much of the same information, but
disregard the name-linking and add sequencing for ordering
siblings.
A hybrid "wikilog" could combine the sequencing and linking info
for the best of both worlds. The addition of citation-linking
organizational info would allow automatic linking of cited text
to the citation source content, and vice versa.
So, organization objects would track changes of their target
content through the event channel. Conversely, their
information would be available to views on those collections -
eg, a wiki or weblog view - as *Zope services* implementing
particular organization service interfaces, via a new Zope
*service discovery* mechanism.
This all suggests that you view content with respect to one
organizational context or another. I would suggest that context
is an object embodying a particular "skin" for the content, an
organizational framework, and workflow policies by which the
content is seen. The current context would probably be an
artifact of the user's session - a changeable artifact, as the
user switches views, as well as what is being viewed.
Federating Organizations - Scaling
- The subjects of the associations may themselves be
organization objects, constituting a basis for federations of
organizations.
- Different kinds of organizational aspects are probably unified
in different ways. For instance, lineage/threading is
trivaial - hierarchies federate by attaching the subhierarchy
at a leaf. Modification time is less independent - but
inherent sorting of times within the parties to the federation
enables low-order compute strategies. Federation of
classification metadata is syndication. RSS, RDF, and other
syndication strategies may constitute our mechanisms for
that. Etc.
- Ultimately, we need to anticipate federation across large
scale ranges, as zope's client *and* storage replication
mechanisms present opportunities for large collections of
sites. We probably need to start our development
concentrating on integral, well-defined collections - but
once we have the outlines of an infrastructure for that, we
may want to see about accomodating recursive containment of
organizations, for extensively federated sites.
Raw Notes
- In principle, organization objects delineate content
collections. Multiple sequence organizations may dictate
different paths through some common items, one representing a
slide presentation of the material and the other an in-depth
manuscript. Or one constituing a weblog-style organization of
items, and another being an author or topic corpus.
- In order to understand the place for these objects in the CMF
implementation, we can experiment with implementing wiki and
weblog-like content collections.