I took a look at walk around when it was first announced. Admittedly, I would need to go back and take a look at it again. I do remember it being more decoupled than was was in WiaB. I don't remember if it was (in my opinion) sufficiently abstract. I seem to remember there were still things like "Blip Operations" and "Wavelet Operations", which seemed to be specific to wave. As I said, it has been quite a while since I looked at walk around (over a year), so I would need to go back and look.
On 6/16/13 10:25 AM, "Dave" <w...@glark.co.uk> wrote: >On 16/06/13 09:29, Michael MacFadden wrote: >> All, >> >> What we would need to do to support integration with Open Office, or any >> other app, is abstract our OT Core Engine in two ways. First it would >> need to become a stand alone service that other apps could hook in to. >> Second we would need to change the operations to be more generic than >>the >> current set that are tied to the wave conversation model. The current OT >> model is not flexible enough to become a core OT framework for other >>apps >> to use. > >Michael, > >Have you had a chance to look at the SLOB layer in google walkaround [1]? > ><quote> >Much of the walkaround code is not specific to Wave, but factored out as >a separate, more general collaboration layer that manages shared live >objects. These objects can be modified by multiple clients at the same >time, with changes made by any client immediately broadcast to all >others. The Wave application is built on top of this, but the live >collaboration layer is flexible enough to support other applications. ></quote> > >It's apache licensed, and took at least some insperation from ShareJS. > >Dave > >[1] http://code.google.com/p/walkaround/ > >> One of the things that always struck me in Wave was that the >>conversation >> model used OT but that the gadget API did not. This is in part because >> gadgets had their own data model which had nothing to do with >> conversations (lines, annotations, etc) which were not supported well by >> Wave's OT. >> >> The google real time API is a step in that direction, but there are a >> couple problems with it. 1) It is a javascript API rather than a >>service. >> 2) You are forced to use it's data types rather than your own, and 3) >>your >> data must be stored on Drive. >> >> I have seen two proprietary OT engines that seem to work well acting as >>a >> service and one open source one. If we are to grow, I think this is the >> direction the OT code needs to go in. >> >> I think Joseph and I (so far as I can tell) are probably the two most >> interested people in doing this. >> >> I think we need to develop mini communities within wave. Those that are >> focused on the OT / CC Stack, those that are focused on clients, those >> that are interested in federation, etc. If we can pair up some folks >>that >> are interested in each of these areas (and others), I think we can make >> some progress. >> >> ~Michael >> >> On 6/15/13 8:25 PM, "Yuri Z" <vega...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Just a note - the rendering to static HTML is experimental and wasn't >>> actually submitted to official Apache Wave repo since there was no >>> agreement on the way on how this should implemented right without >>>breaking >>> static bindings when compiling from GWT to Javascript. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Zachary ³Gamer_Z.² Yaro >>> <zmy...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> @Fleeky, Yuri actually added some >>>> code< >>>> >>>> >>>>https://github.com/vega113/WaveInCloud/tree/master/src/org/waveprotocol >>>>/b >>>> ox/server/rpc/render >>>>> to >>>> WIAB for static HTML rendering, so that could be a solution to your >>>> publishing problems. In addition, Google Wave, Rizzoma, and (I* >>>>*think) >>>> WIAB (with Yuri's code) support exporting to HTML or PDF. Is that >>>>what >>>> you >>>> were asking for? >>>> >>>> @John, I definitely like the idea of being able to log into a wave >>>> server >>>> from OpenOffice and edit waves through it, but I think we need a >>>> standardized wave client-server protocol first. >>>> >>>> >>>> ‹Zachary ³Gamer_Z.² Yaro >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15 June 2013 12:34, Fleeky Flanco <fle...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> john, i was infact using wave as a google docs replacement for a >>>> while it >>>>> worked pretty good the only problem i had with it was that i couldnt >>>>> 'publish' static updates to a front facing page to share with people >>>> who >>>>> didnt feel like registering on my wave server. >>>>> >>>>> an openoffice for wave would be extremely usefull, and could have an >>>>> extremely large impact imo. wave is also already very very close to >>>> having >>>>> this funcitonality. etherpad lite sortof already does this, but i >>>>>kept >>>>> going back to wave because it was actually more responsive, >>>> featurefull, >>>>> and actually crashed less. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 9:29 AM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> I had the down-the-road thought just now that I wanted to put into >>>>>> circulation before I forgot about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> One of the challenges that we will face in developing open source >>>> Wave >>>> is >>>>>> that Google and others - but mostly Google - are out there using >>>>>> operational transform technologies also. So far the Google Drive >>>> Realtime >>>>>> API hasn't had much impact, but it's being "demoed" successfully in >>>> Drive >>>>>> apps like Docs and Presentations. >>>>>> >>>>>> The advantages of an open source Wave implementation are, of course, >>>> that >>>>>> people can own their own data and identity management without >>>> having to >>>>>> rely on a specific vendor's infrastructure. But the flip side of >>>> that >>>> is >>>>>> that you have to look carefully at infrastructure that integrates OT >>>> and >>>>>> understand what you have to do similarly to showcase your >>>> technologies. >>>>>> That brings me to OpenOffice. At some point it will be beneficial to >>>>>> consider how the Wave API can enable apps in the OpenOffice suite to >>>> take >>>>>> advantage of OT technologies in Wave and its other various >>>> features. In >>>>>> fact, it's not unthinkable that an OpenOffice for Wave variant might >>>> not >>>>> be >>>>>> feasible at some point, maintaining a familiar office automation >>>> paradigm >>>>>> as a user interface for those who relate to that sort of tool but >>>> having >>>>>> the power of Wave to drive collaborative document editing, comments, >>>>>> embedded apps and so on, with Wave data structures underneath the OO >>>>>> interface. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just idle thoughts for now, but if we make good progress over the >>>> next >>>>>> several months, it's a sub-project that may help to attract more >>>>> developers >>>>>> to Wave technologies. >>>>>> >>>>>> All the best, >>>>>> >>>>>> John Blossom >>>>>> >> >> >
