Monday, December 2, 2002

Architecture of the World Wide Web Working Draft Updated. 15 November 2002: The W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) has released an updated Working Draft, Architecture of the World Wide Web. Comments are welcome. With technical issues organized around identification, representation, and interaction, the document also addresses some non-technical social issues that contribute to the shared information space. Visit the TAG home page. (News archive) [The World Wide Web Consortium] 5:34:00 PM

Contributing to an intranet. I'm trying to come up with more models for thinking about communication.  I came up with a question: What affects my contributions?  And some attributes of an answer: inertia - how hard is it for me to make a contribution reward - what do I get in return for contributing value - how much use can be made of my contribution A powerful intranet system makes it easy for people to contribute, gives them a direct return on investment and allows what they have added to be re-used in as many ways as possible. Typically an employee can contribute via: e-mail bulletin board / discussion list / group mailbox document management system database A cursory examination of these options follows: e-mail It is very easy to write e-mails but often harder to know who to send them to for maximum value.  They often go unacknowledged, its very hard to tell if they've had the desired impact and it's increasingly hard to know if and how to re-use the content of an e-mail.  Also with the quantity of e-mail people receive these days I think the law of diminishing returns is at work.  More e-mail (even better e-mail) isn't going to make things any better. bulletin board On the face of it bulletin boards and other discussion groups work very well.  However as long time users will attest they have many significant drawbacks.  The first is that it is very hard to keep on track as an initial discussion widens out in collaboration.  Inevitably people look to take the traffic "elsewhere".  Popular discussion groups can get croweded very quickly which is a curse and a curse.  A crowded group can intimidate new comers and makes it harder for members to find what they are interested in.  A corrolary of this is that it soon becomes impossible to find anything for re-use. document management system These days web-based document management systems (which all call themselves knowledge management systems in the hope you won't know the difference) tend to be pretty easy to use.  As ways of storing and indexing large collections of documents they work very well, but they often fail to solve the underlying problems of managing an organisations knowledge.   This is because, often, the knowledge isn't in the formal documentation. Example:  I'm an engineer working for a company who make handheld wireless workstations.  I acquire through on-site testing some valuable knowledge about a problem with making our equipment work in their situation.  I could write this up in a document and post it in the DMS but more likely I will put it in a notebook or on a post-It or just tell my colleagues about it. This kind of micro-knowledge (micro-content) is often where the useful knowledge lies and it can be very hard to get at if your systems all work at the macro level. database What company doesn't have at least a CRM system today?  Supposedly the channel for storing all information.  But if you take my previous example where does that knowledge go?  It's not information about the customer (at least not really).  And that assumes that your CRM system is flexible enough to handle unexpected data.  Most either aren't or are never properly implemented. Databases are often cumbersome, unfriendly and inflexible.  Also where information goes in, it is often much harder to get it out again in any sensible form (another Access report anybody?).   As I have written before I do believe that all of these systems have a valuable role to play in building a successful intranet, however they address only the macro level and much of the knowledge an organisation needs to gain an understanding of itself and a competitve advantage over it's peers is micro-content. What is required is a communication medium that has low inertia, rewards the constributor and builds shared value.  Answer: weblogs, or more accurately knowledge-logs. More later. [Curiouser and curiouser!] 12:58:49 PM

liveTopics in RSS2.0 #2. Matt Mower's Knowledge Log - ( liveTopics, k-log, radio, blogging, RSS ): "This will enable a smart aggregator to use the topic's for filtering & combining feeds together." + filtering is in the pipeline for myRadio, on dates, keywords, and now topics. will be tricky to devise a UI. + filter a single feed, or multiple feeds. multiple feeds would require agreement on a common pool of topics, i think. + Syndication, with meta-data, gathered by smart aggregators, has a lot of possibilities. It would be cool to hear more about usage scenarios. [Brain Off] Mikel picks up on my post yesterday regarding adding topics to Radio RSS.  I've got a few things in mind for this, but I'm sure others will really lead the way.  Let's just address one point first. When trying to handle feeds from multiple blogs, inevitably, as Mikel points out, we will reach the situation where people using different words to mean the same topic.  This will be a problem, but hopefully not as a big of a problem as it could be.  It is for this reason that I have been tracking XFML so carefully.  With XFML we have the ability to say "A's topic X is the same as B's topic Y".  liveTopics already does XFML. So I think the first and simplest usage scenario will be within the type of aggregators that we have now as a way of filtering a feed to get rid of posts we deem irrelevant.  This will allow us to subscribe to many, many more feeds since we don't have to weed out so much chaff.  Although I think we'll need to be careful as it may make it more difficult to experience serendipitous moments. The next scenario I can imagine is as a way of producing a consolidated "on-topic" feed from a number of other feeds.  Combined with technology to scrape RSS from sites and databases and with a little automagic to add topics where they don't exist this could be very powerful. My imagination runs out here, maybe someone else..? [Curiouser and curiouser!] 12:55:30 PM

MS fights Open Source with freebies - an eyewitness writes -- "When I told them that I'd need at least ten licenses and at $400/each, this would be too much for me for the beginning, they offered to give us the license for free - and not only for now, but also for the future when we kept working on Microsoft." [The Register] Another clear example of the competitive nature of computing's most-powerful company. Of course, when you have virtually unlimited cash resources, it's easy to give away software here and there to prevent individual defections that might lead to broader trends *away* from the company's core revenue sources. 12:38:33 PM