[Foss4g2009] Re: FOSS4G 2009 Website Submissions

Volker Mische volker.mische at gmail.com
Thu Jan 8 16:32:53 EST 2009


It would be nice if you could send it to me. I already expected (a) and
(b), though it might be a good reference to get started.

Cheers,
  Volker

Paul Ramsey wrote:
> 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