[Foss4g2009] Re: FOSS4G 2009 Website Submissions
Paul Ramsey
pramsey at cleverelephant.ca
Wed Jan 7 16:40:55 EST 2009
It's still around, and I can send it to you. It's (a) ugly and (b)
fairly specific to the database design I used for abstract management.
P.
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Volker Mische <volker.mische at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> This sounds like a good idea. Is the software you used still there, or
> do we need to build our own?
>
> Cheers,
> Volker
>
> Paul Ramsey wrote:
>> I gave people a list of everything, in random order, with the ability
>> so sub-set it with a keyword search. So if they wanted, the could vote
>> on only PostGIS things, and if they started from the top and worked
>> down then got tired, we'd still get a randomly distributed set of
>> preferences.
>>
>> P.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Volker Mische <volker.mische at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I like to keep the effort as minimal as possible. Therefore I would say
>>> solution 2+3.
>>>
>>> I see no problem if everyone who wants to submit a workshop/abstract has
>>> to register. It takes 5min for everyone, and all of them should be
>>> capable of registering at a website. And it would save our time to find
>>> a workaround with a dummy user.
>>>
>>> I guess for the voting we need to get it somehow out of the database,
>>> but this should be a matter of a small script.
>>>
>>> One open question for me is: What do we use for voting. I like
>>> http://www.ideatorrent.org/. The problem is that once a workshop is in
>>> the "top 10" it's likely that people just vote for those at the top, and
>>> not the ones at the bottom.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Volker
>>>
>>> mapbutcher wrote:
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> I've begun to configure the 2009 OCS conference pages on the OCS
>>>> instance on the OSGeo box. If you don't already have an account it may
>>>> be an idea to create one:
>>>>
>>>> http://conference.osgeo.org/index.php/foss4g/2009/user/account
>>>>
>>>> Volker, Shoaib - any preference on which way we should go based upon my
>>>> earlier email?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2009/1/5 Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>
>>>>
>>>> Copying to the foss4g2009 email list for archiving.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lorenzo Becchi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Simon, thank you to include me in this list.
>>>> I would suggest to use a mailing list to go on with this
>>>> conversation because it is important to have it archived, IMO.
>>>> another thing I would like to suggest is the use of a wiki page,
>>>> you've made so many important questions that it is normal that
>>>> you will receive an answer at the time, if you're lucky ;-)
>>>>
>>>> my experience with OCS is still very limited, I've just set up
>>>> an instance [1] to practice. The instalation is pretty easy if
>>>> you don't have safe_mode php (I do).
>>>>
>>>> I've started a private conversation with Tyler about part of
>>>> your questions and he has discovered interesting features that I
>>>> guess he will comment to everybody.
>>>>
>>>> I'll check out the few answers I can maybe give while we decide
>>>> if it's worth to move the conversation to foss4g2009 mailing list.
>>>>
>>>> ciao
>>>> Lorenzo
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://foss4g2010.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> mapbutcher wrote:
>>>>
>>>> All, (Lorenzo cc'd because of your recent emails to
>>>> OSGeo-conf, Gavin your experience of OCS in 2008 may help
>>>> shape our choice of scenario?)
>>>>
>>>> We need to 'integrate' the current site
>>>> (http:.//2009.foss4g.org/ <http://2009.foss4g.org/>
>>>> <http://2009.foss4g.org/>) with OCS for 2009. We need to
>>>> have these processes handled:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Workshop submission (2nd February 2009 Call for
>>>> workshops open)
>>>> 2. Abstract submission (9th March 2009 Call for abstracts
>>>> open)
>>>>
>>>> I've purposefully not discussed here the presentation of the
>>>> conference programme on the website as i feel this adds a
>>>> layer of complexity to the integration which we should
>>>> handle separately. Instead I suggest we work on this
>>>> separate from the submission process - any feelings on
>>>> this? Given the time frames I'd like to suggest the
>>>> following - I'm open to other scenarios but please consider
>>>> our time frame:
>>>>
>>>> Scenario 1 - Partial Integration
>>>>
>>>> a) We develop a workshop proposal and abstract submission
>>>> page external from OCS for the current site
>>>> (http://2009.foss4g.org/).
>>>> b) Ideally it would be preferable if these pages do not
>>>> require authorisation to make the process of submission
>>>> simple (If possible? - see clarification questions below)
>>>> c) Submissions are made directly into the OCS database via
>>>> an OCS API (If possible? - see clarification questions below)
>>>> d) Submissions are reviewed internally by OC using OCS (If
>>>> possible? - see clarification questions below)
>>>>
>>>> Scenario 2 - OCS
>>>>
>>>> a) We link a new submission page on the current site to
>>>> OSGeo OCS instance (ideally the most obvious entry point -
>>>> i.e. register, submission but not just OCS home)
>>>> b) We use what css capability in OCS to make these sites
>>>> 'appear as one'
>>>> c) Workshop proposals are put through as submissions in OCS
>>>> under a 'workshop' track
>>>> d) We follow the OCS work flows for review
>>>>
>>>> Scenario 3 - OCS and Review through current site
>>>>
>>>> a) We follow scenario 1 or 2 (probably 2) above until
>>>> submission is complete
>>>> b) We provide visibility onto OCS data from the current site
>>>> for the following (both of these we develop outside of OCS):
>>>> i) Workshop and Presentation Open Vote
>>>> ii)Online Programme
>>>> From a practical point of view we have limited time &
>>>> resources. Granted OCS has cosmetic issues as well as having
>>>> a rather rigid work flow but it brings a certain amount to
>>>> the table which we may not have the resources to replicate
>>>> in time for the workshop and abstract submission opening.
>>>> Personally I cannot throw much time at this in January,
>>>> Shoaib & Volker what is your availability? Given this my
>>>> preference would be Scenario 3 with the following outline
>>>> approach:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Create 2009 Conference in OCS on OSGeo box (easy)
>>>> 2. Configure the necessary parts for submissions (more time
>>>> consuming, but not tricky)
>>>> 3. Set up styles(again a bit time consuming)
>>>> 4. Test submission work flow
>>>> 5. Create registration page on 2009.foss4g outlining
>>>> submission
>>>> work flow and with links into OCS
>>>> 6. Begin to develop a workshop and presentation open vote
>>>> page\backend for 2009.foss4g
>>>> 7. Begin to develop a programme page\backend for 2009.foss4g
>>>>
>>>> Below are some clarification questions that Shoaib and I
>>>> discussed when we met in December which some people may be
>>>> able to answer
>>>>
>>>> 1. What version of OCS is OSGeo using currently?
>>>> 2. What backend does OSGeo use for OCS?
>>>> 3. Does OCS allow abstracts once reviewed and approved to be
>>>> 'assigned' to a time slot in the programme?
>>>> 4. OCS does not support 'workshop' proposal submission is this
>>>> correct? i.e. it only supports abstract submission
>>>> 5. What information do we need to gather as part of workshop
>>>> submissions?
>>>> 6. Does OCS support ATOM/RSS and iCal feed creation
>>>> 7. Does OCS allow the program to be displayed on a website
>>>> in the
>>>> form of a calender, my understanding is that OCS only
>>>> displays a
>>>> conference program as a list?
>>>> 8. Does OCS have support for conference Streams/Themes? if
>>>> so does
>>>> if allow Abstracts and Workshops to be assigned to
>>>> Themes? My
>>>> understanding is that OCS uses 'Tracks' to do this?
>>>> 9. Does OCS have an API to submit abstracts so the we can
>>>> call it
>>>> directly from the foss4g website without having to
>>>> transition to
>>>> another site. e.g. can we setup the abstract submission
>>>> form on
>>>> FOSS4G that calls the OCS with an HTTP Post request. My
>>>> understanding is that there isn't an API and there are
>>>> some very
>>>> basic import mechanisms
>>>> 10. How does OCS support email notification of
>>>> proposal/abstract
>>>> submission & approval?
>>>> 11. Does OCS require every user to login with the correct
>>>> roles or
>>>> can we by-pass this requirement to simplify the the
>>>> abstract/workshop submission? e.g. will this require a
>>>> proxy user?
>>>> 12. If we submit Abstract/Workshops to the back end
>>>> directly (by
>>>> passing OCS) can OCS still be used to review and
>>>> approve them?
>>>> 13. How hard is it to change the theme and layout of the OCS
>>>> webpages so that the transition between the foss4g site
>>>> and OCS
>>>> is as smooth as possible
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We need to begin to move on this ASAP so if we can gather
>>>> feedback, preferences etc by 8th Dec:
>>>> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=8&month=1&year=2009&hour=12&min=0&sec=0&p1=240
>>>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=8&month=1&year=2009&hour=12&min=0&sec=0&p1=240>
>>>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=8&month=1&year=2009&hour=12&min=0&sec=0&p1=240
>>>> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=8&month=1&year=2009&hour=12&min=0&sec=0&p1=240>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cameron can we take a decision on the way forward thereafter?
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cameron Shorter
>>>> Geospatial Systems Architect
>>>> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
>>>> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
>>>>
>>>> Think Globally, Fix Locally
>>>> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
>>>> http://www.lisasoft.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foss4g2009 mailing list
>>> Foss4g2009 at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2009
>>>
>
>
More information about the Foss4g2009
mailing list