These are some notes about Shared Copy, a newish Web 2.0 annotation tool. Overall, I didn't find it particularly usable - or at least, I couldn't figure out a good way to plug it into my existing workflow.
So I was using SharedCopy for an article on CIO. First, wow, I didn't realize a javascript bookmark could do that! Could be a very handy thing for WeBrowser. Induce people to upgrade when they try to navigate - or intercept the navigation and do it through the overlay. Also have some thoughts on browser/desktop integration.
http://r3.sharedcopy.com/737cug
http://r4.sharedcopy.com/1db6qa
You can't navigate in shared copy - you can't annotate a collection of pages. (In fact navigation is disabled!)
So this means you have to annotate, save, get a URL. Particularly annoying when an article has many pages. (one workaround in that case is to annotate the print page)
"One way to address this under consideration uses peer-to-peer knowledge
or collaborative history of a site—but that raises new problems." - huge value add.
"Sure, we can put in things to put into browsers and frameworks to
make it possible to persist offline. But the larger, harder challenge"
is making the software know what to do. Does the person writing the app
do all that intelligence on both the client and the server—in ASP or
Perl or whatever? "Yes, we provided the tech capability to store data
offline," he says, but it leaves a lot of hard work for the developer
to connect those dots and to answer difficult questions. Do I need to
set policy? As an end user, do I want to do that? Should a Web
application be able to share bank info with Facebook? "That's why we're
engaging with the community of developers the way we are," says
Hachamovitch.
So I was using SharedCopy for an article on CIO. First, wow, I didn't realize a javascript bookmark could do that! Could be a very handy thing for WeBrowser. Induce people to upgrade when they try to navigate - or intercept the navigation and do it through the overlay. Also have some thoughts on browser/desktop integration.
http://r3.sharedcopy.com/737cug
http://r4.sharedcopy.com/1db6qa
You can't navigate in shared copy - you can't annotate a collection of pages. (In fact navigation is disabled!)
So this means you have to annotate, save, get a URL. Particularly annoying when an article has many pages. (one workaround in that case is to annotate the print page)
"One way to address this under consideration uses peer-to-peer knowledge
or collaborative history of a site—but that raises new problems." - huge value add.
"Sure, we can put in things to put into browsers and frameworks to
make it possible to persist offline. But the larger, harder challenge"
is making the software know what to do. Does the person writing the app
do all that intelligence on both the client and the server—in ASP or
Perl or whatever? "Yes, we provided the tech capability to store data
offline," he says, but it leaves a lot of hard work for the developer
to connect those dots and to answer difficult questions. Do I need to
set policy? As an end user, do I want to do that? Should a Web
application be able to share bank info with Facebook? "That's why we're
engaging with the community of developers the way we are," says
Hachamovitch.
Developers should be part of the discussion.
"Developers need to participate in the evolution of their platform
proactively," Schroepfer says. They can participate in helping the
process, he says, and they have an important stake in doing so.
Ok - apache dirt would be an eclipse wrapped browser over resin and maybe a database. not sure what to do with IIS. eclipse provides the browser (well, the javascript runtime) with some special objects to do desktop integration. packages could be simple or complex - simple would just be a set of files and the server points to the root. complex (java or cgi or) would require some specialized layout; e.g. cgi-bin or WEB-INF. some apps require special server parms, so that should be taken care of, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment