Skip to main content

Improving problem description

This week is set off for improving the chapter on problem description. Every thesis has a "problemstilling", a problem which the thesis should solve. A goal, or a challenge. Currently the chapter looks a little something like this:

Challenges

What are the challenges that have pushed forth content management. What are the problems IT-departmens suffer from today related to web content. Issues on web-management.

The issues of web content management

Content is not maneuvrable. There is too much of it, too many web pages with too many attached documents. Often a corporation will put much resource into sustainin a site map and a navigation tree, but if these are made manually, it will be a lot of work and no guarantee to be correct. Searching is a great shortcut to make all content available, but searching the right way is easier said than done. Does the search engine check if the search word was incorrectly spelled? Are there any synonyms of the search word which should be checked?


Content is useless. The web page is full of dead links. There exists many pages and documents which are not linked to at all, and therefore never will be accessed. It is safe to say that content which is not accessed and used has no value.


Content is not automatically accessible. No XML export. Recently many news-sites have offered the option of subscribing via popular RSS-feeds. By subscribing to these feeds in RSS-readers or news-aggregators, the process of collecting news from these sites is turned from a pull-protocol (actively surfing around on news-sites) into a push-protocol (content is pushed to the reader, like mail to a recipient).


Content has no meta information. There has a been a noteworthy increase in the ability to tag or label various data objects with meta data, like in the header of a HTML-page, or in the properties of a Word-document. It is difficult to force users into actually using these features manually. If the title of this document is "Content Management", why should I write in its meta-data that it is about the same topic? A possible solution to the meta-problem lies in automatically tagging content [HP, 2004].


Content is technically unaccessible. Dependancy to specific software or platform restricts the numbers of users.


-------

So I need to come up with something more completing this chapter. A good CMS doesn't produce the problems mentioned above. CMS-es like this already exist, I'm sure. And the goal of the thesis could indeed be to present a CMS solving these, by the use of open standards. To get the open source bit in, I should add something about functionality and customization (functionality is content too!, like Boiko said). A old rusty CMS, or even a modern one (but not a tidy one) can be quite hard to extend, having components which are not reusable. Content is not reusable.

Interestingly, I'm not the only one who's been asking questions about meta-data. Seth Cambridge is another blogger I just added to my bloglines. But still it remains a problem that so much of the CMS theory landscape remains opinions through blogs and online articles, mediums not really appreciated by the people who will judge my thesis. I might have to get back to basis and read up on some ancient IT-theory I can reuse in this context (but I haven't really got time to do that).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Open source CMS evaluations

I have now seen three more or less serious open source CMS reviews. First guy to hit the field was Matt Raible ( 1 2 3 4 ), ending up with Drupal , Joomla , Magnolia , OpenCms and MeshCMS being runner-ups. Then there is OpenAdvantage that tries out a handful ( Drupal , Exponent CMS , Lenya , Mambo , and Silva ), including Plone which they use for their own site (funny/annoying that the entire site has no RSS-feeds, nor is it possible to comment on the articles), following Matt's approach by exluding many CMS that seem not to fit the criteria. It is somewhat strange that OpenAdvantage cuts away Magnolia because it "Requires J2EE server; difficult to install and configure; more of a framework than CMS", and proceed to include Apache Lenya in the full evaluation. Magnolia does not require a J2EE server. It runs on Tomcat just like Lenya does (maybe it's an idea to bundle Magnolia with Jetty to make it seem more lightweight). I'm still sure that OpenAdvant...
6 comments
Read more

Git tools for keeping patches on top of moving upstreams

At work, we maintain patches for some pretty large open source repositories that regularly release new versions, forcing us to update our patches to match. So far, we've been using basic Git operations to transplant our modifications from one major version of the upstream to the next. Every time we make such a transplant, we simply squash together the modifications we made in the previous version, and land it as one big commit into the next version. Those who are used to very stringent keeping of Git history may wrinkle their nose at this, but it is a pragmatic choice. Maintaining modifications on top of the rapidly changing upstream is a lot of work, and so far we haven't had the opportunity to figure out a more clever way to do it. Nor have we really suffered any consequences of not having an easy to read history of our modifications - it's a relatively small amount of patches, after all. With a recent boost in team size, we may have that opportunity. Also the need for be...
1 comment
Read more

The Git Users Mailing List

A year ago or so, I came across the Git-user mailing list (aka. "Git for human beings"). Over the year, I grew a little addicted to helping people out with their Git problems. When the new git-scm.com webpage launched , and the link to the mailing list had disappeared, I was quick to ask them to add it again . I think this mailing list fills an important hole in the Git community between: The Git developer mailing list git@vger.kernel.org  - which I find to be a bit too hard-core and scary for Git newbies. Besides, the Majordomo mailing list system is pretty archaic, and I personally can't stand browsing or searching in the Gmane archives. The IRC channel #git on Freenode, which is a bit out-of-reach for people who never experienced the glory days of IRC. Furthermore, when the channel is busy, it's a big pain to follow any discussion. StackOverflow questions tagged git , these come pretty close, but it's a bit hard to keep an overview of what questio...
Post a Comment
Read more

Git-SVN Mirror without the annoying update-ref

This post is part of  a series on Git and Subversion . To see all the related posts, screencasts and other resources, please  click here .  So no sooner than I had done my git-svn presentation at JavaZone , I got word of a slightly different Git-SVN mirror setup that makes it a bit easier to work with: In short, my old recipe includes an annoying git update-ref step to keep the git-svn remote reference up to date with the central bare git repo. This new recipe avoids this, so we can simply use git svn dcommit   directly. So, longer version, with the details. My original recipe is laid out in five steps: Clone a fresh Git repo from Subversion. This will be our  fetching repo. Set up a  bare repo. Configure pushing from the fetching repo to bare repo In the shoes of a developer, clone the repo Set up an SVN remote in the developer's repo In the new approach, we redefine those last two steps: (See the original post for how to do the fir...
17 comments
Read more

Git Stash Blooper (Could not restore untracked files from stash)

The other day I accidentally did a git stash -a , which means it stashes *everything*, including ignored output files (target, build, classes, etc). Ooooops.. What I meant to do was git stash -u , meaning stash modifications plus untracked new files. Anyhows, I ended up with a big fat stash I couldn't get back out. Each time I tried, I got something like this: .../target/temp/dozer.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/core.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/joda-time.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/foo.war already exists, no checkout Could not restore untracked files from stash No matter how I tried checking out different revisions (like the one where I actually made the stash), or using --force, I got the same error. Now these were one of those "keep cool for a second, there's a git way to fix this"situation. I figured: A stash is basically a commit. If we look at my recent commits using   git log --graph --...
12 comments
Read more