[Standards] whiteboarding and shared editing

Bishop, Michael W. CONTR J9C880 Michael.Bishop at je.jfcom.mil
Thu Aug 16 17:17:34 UTC 2007


> Requirements, requirements, requirements. Again, it would help for
> someone to write a clear and comprehensive requirements doc.

> It would also help for you to summarize the ways in which
whiteboarding
> is more than modifying an XML document. That would help us find common
> ground and achieve consensus.

While I don't have a requirements doc, I can share the problems we tried
to solve with our whiteboarding approach we recently submitted:

- The editing of shared XML documents.
- Logical ordering of said shared documents.
- Presentation. (Page changes and a future revision to support cursor
position.)
- Roles.  (Who can edit?  Who can only observe?)
- Current state.  A user can join and get the current state.
- History.  A user who got disconnected can rejoin and ask for the last
X actions to occur.

> If someone takes time and look into http://coccinella.im/memo/sync
they will see that it is completely
> generic and general. There is nothing specific to whiteboarding and it
could be used in any context where
> the basic assumptions are valid.

While reading some of the discussions on this topic in the list, I
realized that our protocol shares some of the same characteristics.
While it was designed specifically for whiteboarding using SVG as a
medium, the protocol itself does not deal with SVG.  The manipulation of
the SVG document can be applied to any XML in any namespace.  While it's
been written as a whiteboard protocol, nothing forces it to be one.  It
would work as-is as a shared XML document protocol with permissions,
history, current state, and presentation.

Michael Bishop 

-----Original Message-----
From: standards-bounces at xmpp.org [mailto:standards-bounces at xmpp.org] On
Behalf Of Mats Bengtsson
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:54 AM
To: standards at xmpp.org
Subject: Re: [Standards] whiteboarding and shared editing


Peter wrote:
> Greg Hudson wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 22:30 -0600, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> >> I see nothing artificial about trying to build a generalized 
>>> >> approach that we can re-use for shared editing and real-time 
>>> >> synchronization of a wide variety of XML formats, not just SVG.
>> > 
>> > I don't know if it's "artificial" or not, but "you should go back 
>> > and solve a much more general and more vaguely defined problem" is 
>> > generally a good way to kill a project.
>> > 
>> > A generic XML editor isn't going to know much about the semantics 
>> > of the document it is editing.  It's not necessarily going to be a 
>> > good framework for a whiteboarding application, any more than emacs

>> > is a good foundation for Photoshop.  They both edit files, but...
> 
> I don't think anyone is arguing for a general *application* that would

> do shared XML editing that would do whiteboarding, spreadsheets, word 
> processing, presentations, and everything else under the sun. But it 
> seems wasteful for us to define separate XML editing/syncronization 
> protocols for each application type, unless there really are special 
> considerations that make it is impossible to use the same underlying 
> technology for each. Which is what we're talking about taking some 
> time to explore...
> 

If someone takes time and look into http://coccinella.im/memo/sync they
will see that it is completely generic and general. There is nothing
specific to whiteboarding and it could be used in any context where the
basic assumptions are valid.

However, the basic assumptions imply that we haven't dealt with editing
parts of CHDATA or parts of attributes, but elements are treated as
entities.

Mats



More information about the Standards mailing list