In-person would be great. I am NYC/Boston area, where is everyone else. In the meantime much can be done on Hangouts to make in-person as productive as possible. J
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yep, I agree. Where should _that_ discussion happen? > > -J > > > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Michael MacFadden > <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > A google hang out amongst wave developers is a great idea. However this > is not a substitute for presenting and discussing the future of OT with the > active research community. > > > > ~Michael > > > > On Jun 16, 2013, at 5:32 PM, John Blossom <jblos...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Joseph, my thought is that we can have a Google+ Hangout and invite > >> everyone in the Wave community and beyond interested in OT and related > >> issues. Doesn't have to be perfect, we just need to get the > >> dialogue.rolling, it seems. We can always have more. Say Weds or > Thursday > >> around 1700 UT+1? Pick a number. John > >> > >> All the best, > >> > >> John Blossom > >> > >> email: jblos...@gmail.com > >> phone: 203.293.8511 > >> google+: https://google.com/+JohnBlossom > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Joseph Gentle <jose...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Sounds interesting. Where is this going to be held? It might be > >>> interesting for a few people on this list, too. > >>> > >>> -J > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Michael MacFadden > >>> <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> After hooking up with Google for wave. I have been the lead architect > >>> for an OT framework much like the real time drive API being built at my > >>> company. I am encouraging my developers to reengage the apache > community so > >>> we can actively contribute back. We have also done a in depth > literature > >>> review regarding OT and have worked with many other teams adding OT to > >>> several projects. > >>>> > >>>> I personally will be chairing the 14th International Workshop on > >>> Collaborative Editing Systems (IWCES) at the ACM Computer Supported > >>> Collaborative Work (CSCW) conference next February. This workshop is > one of > >>> the primary places where leading OT researchers, industry, and open > source > >>> projects come to exchange ideas. > >>>> > >>>> I think this would be a very good community for you to get involved > with > >>> if you are looking at OT. There are a lot of lessons learned, > especially on > >>> using OT for rich document editing (word, PowerPoint, Vim, etc. ). > >>>> > >>>> I am sure there are more than enough extremely smart folks on the Open > >>> Office team, but perhaps I/we could help out if you are not to far > along. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> > >>>> ~Michael > >>>> > >>>> On Jun 16, 2013, at 6:50 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Adding Svante Schubert to the thread, from the ODF Toolkit project. > >>>>> He also chairs the subcommittee at OASIS that has been looking at OT > >>>>> for change tracking in ODF. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Michael MacFadden > >>>>> <michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 6/16/13 2:51 PM, "Michael MacFadden" < > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Rob, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I would be interested in continuing this conversation. I have been > >>>>>>> working with the top minds in OT for the past few years. I am > excited > >>> to > >>>>>>> hear the OO is interested in an OT supported mechanism. How far > along > >>> are > >>>>>>> you in the process? > >>>>> > >>>>> It is very early and mainly happening in the standards committee at > >>>>> OASIS. The ultimate aim is to have something that could work across > >>>>> applications, not just between two OpenOffice instances. So this > >>>>> requires a sensitivity to the document model abstraction, to work at > >>>>> the ODF level, not just with an application's internal view of a > >>>>> document. > >>>>> > >>>>> OpenOffice committers are involved in the standardization side of > >>>>> this, as well as LibreOffice and Calligra and Gnumeric, as well as > >>>>> Microsoft. > >>>>> > >>>>> Initially it is about defining the document model, in a way that > makes > >>>>> sense to the user. Since tracked changes are visible to the user, to > >>>>> approve or reject, we need it at a granularity that makes sense to > >>>>> them. Then based on those primitives, and the associated actions, we > >>>>> can develop an XML-based notation for expressing the state > >>>>> transformations. That gets us to the static/stored form of > >>>>> traditional change tracking. > >>>>> > >>>>> Not in plan officially is the next step, which would be the protocols > >>>>> for exchanging such information in real-time. But it is a > possibility > >>>>> (even a likelihood) that is informing our design decisions. We're > >>>>> mindful that the real-time collaborative editing is the logical next > >>>>> step and we're trying to lay the right foundations for that at the > >>>>> format level. > >>>>> > >>>>> One sub-goal, for enabling the real-time side of this, would be to > >>>>> standardize the protocols at some level, so clients from different > >>>>> vendors could do this kind of collaboration in a heterogeneous kind > of > >>>>> way. Is there anything in Wave that would be a good basis for a > >>>>> standard? > >>>>> > >>>>> Of course a perfectly valid approach would be to prototype first and > >>>>> then standardize. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>> -Rob > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> ~Michael > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Jun 16, 2013, at 11:00 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I'm not subscribed to this list, but Christian Grobmeier pointed > me > >>> to > >>>>>>>> John's post about how OT and Wave could be relevant to OpenOffice. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I wanted to mention that the idea is being discussed, but at the > >>>>>>>> standards level. The default document format for OpenOffice is > Open > >>>>>>>> Document Format (ODF), which is standardized at OASIS and ISO. (I > >>>>>>>> chair the committee at OASIS). We're currently working on ODF 1.3 > >>> and > >>>>>>>> as part of that we're adding a new change tracking mechanism > based on > >>>>>>>> OT. This is the traditional asynchronous change tracking that > office > >>>>>>>> suites have had for years, but modeled on OT terms. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> And, although not specified at this point, we're also aware that > OT > >>>>>>>> enables more interesting modes of collaboration, including > >>>>>>>> synchronous/real-time, co-editing, etc. That's the main reason > the > >>> OT > >>>>>>>> approach is attractive, is that we can have a single model that > will > >>>>>>>> work for change tracking as well as co-editing. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Once we get the standard side of this elaborated in more details, > >>> then > >>>>>>>> the next step will be to get it implemented in Apache OpenOffice > as > >>>>>>>> well as the Apache ODF Toolit (incubating). But the pace of > >>>>>>>> standardization is slow, and I wouldn't expect this before 2014. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -Rob > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's > >>>>> individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous > >>>>> collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position > >>>>> of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or > disorganized) > >>>>> or national football association. The contents of said note are not > >>>>> guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed > for > >>>>> metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable > >>>>> for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be > >>>>> exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or > >>>>> even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous. > >>>>> Be careful. > >>> >
