An old article but a good on:
Interface Design for Programmers
I like his ideas. It amazes me to realize how new and cutting edge all of this is. UML doesn't even seem to play into these pictures, but it is earmarked for the challenges suggested by all levels of software development.
Ok - I am already getting emails about musicolab (how do people find this ?) requesting information and the like.
I have a few options 1) Set up a mailing list 2) Set up community forums 3) Set up a wiki 4) Set up a news site 5) Combination of the above
It is hard not to dissapoint a growing community, so I don't want to get expectations high.
A community forum type set up would allow me to start people trading music on their own dime. It could act as a meeting place to facilitate a simple file sharing model. I'd also be able to scrape signed up users into any system we build in the future.
Still - finding and administering a good forum is a pain.
Any thoughts?
I saw the matrix - reloaded again last night.
This post has nothing really to do with that fact, as you likely have both seen that movie and this tool:
The ASP.NET Web Matrix Project (Reloaded!)
A WYSIWYG IDE for ASP.NET developed by MS. I love acronyms.
I have a feeling you already have it, but I'll archive it here regardless.
Download for the .Net 1.1 Framework SDK
If you haven't downloaded it since April 9, 2003 then these are updated versions.
Due to the change on the musicolab site (splash page) I've hidden the contents of the entire /musicolab/ directory using .htaccess (with the exception of the splash and extranet)
If you experience any troubles finding data that you previously found, let me know the url you are attempting to access and I will see what I can do to open the door wider.
Ok - took down old musicolab site and put a splash page in its place.
View it in all its glory here:
musicolab home page
As we progress, I'll try and keep it updated in some manner.
Not that it matters - but I've updated to the 2.64 version of moveable type.
You can now enter new categories (and feel free to do so).
I really like this program.
Very interesting article on ... well sociobiology and information dissemination.
Interesting quote:
What evolution teaches us is this: in order to understand the deeper roots of our need to generate and manage information, we need to look beyond the individual organism, towards the social groups that drive the mechanisms of evolution and adaptation for all species.In recent years, the term “social software” has gained currency as a rubric for describing a new breed of software: groupware, social network visualization, discussion lists, and a host of other collaborative tools that support the needs of small, self-selected groups of individuals rather than organizational imperatives.
The real promise of social software has less to do with commercial productivity, and more to do with generating social capital: trust, social engagement, and the development of sustainable knowledge-sharing mechanisms that enable our advancement and evolution within social groups.
I suppose it is unwise to ignore the greater social responsibility inherent in the position that collaborative software can play ...
[update] :: here is the link to the actual article:
http://www.boxesandarrows.com/archives/the_sociobiology_of_information_architecture.php
At the risk of overloading you with information - consider reading:
http://www.extremeprogramming.org/
This site explains the 'extreme programmin' (XP) philosophy. Not really my cup'o'tea, but maybe I just don't like the name.
It again is similar to RAD and IAD in that it focuses on user participation.
I think our philosophy for development draws from each of these while remaining unique. Strict adherence to any specific methodology may prove unwise in the long run.
A constant re-assesment of the plan (proposed methodology) at the initial stage is my solution. I'll update plan documents to reflect this.
This is another Application development strategy document.
Iterative Application Development: An Evolutionary Strategy for the '90s
I like this philosophy, and do not see it as compentative (rather addative) to RAD.
Some nice quotes:
Client-centered design must become the focus of application design. Rapid prototyping cycles that center on the client's needs, rather than on abstract analysis, result in better applications and faster user acceptance.Faster application development is a requirement of client-centered design. If development and review cycles do not occur quickly, a development project can easily lose focus.
Objects...Objects...and more Objects drive today's component development, resulting in more reliable, faster code. Reusable objects ensure consistency and faster development.
The whole thing is worth a read. Loving it.
Kinda close development strategy to what we have been thinking:
http://www.itsd.gov.hk/itsd/english/itgov/download/g47a.pdf
Called RAD (Rapid Appplication Development).
Worth a read - I like our approach a little better actually.
My list of todo's (so I don't forget)
1) document our last 3 brainstorms
2) create plan drawings
3) create initial UML diagrams
4) tear down musicolab and put up a community site
5) research on creating a company around colab technologies
This weekend I'll see what I can do re: documentation. I think good documentation can generate momentum - and a strong momentum in a good direction is exactly what we need at this stage.
Well - I need to update our web presence - but it feels to early to start generating too much interest (in a potentially explosive market).
Good research areas for us here (wiki):
http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Peer-To-Peer
http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/wiki.pl?File_Sharing
http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Collaboration
http://www.infoanarchy.org/wiki/wiki.pl?File_Sharing_Protocols
I think I'll remove musicolab as it stands and replace with information pages when I get the time (whenever that happens ...)
Open source is another good reading place for all of the information regarding open source I think we need. They maintain a list of licenses that meet their approval.
Also worth mentioning on the subject is creative commons. I have no doubt the types of copyright (or intellectual property protection) licenses that they offer will become standardized in some form sooner or later. Something worth watching.
Finally, I do agree with your opinion on the dangers of using open source. Further to it is my comment that it would be easier to take a closed source project and make it open source than it would to go the other way. i.e. If we need help and the only way to get it is open source, then we can go that route.
Wow, its like religion...
Here are a few links fom the open source side:
I figure every disscussion like this needs to start with the GNU General Public License.
Then there is the GNU Lesser General Public License which appears to differ from the GNU GPL by allowing libraries made under it to be incorporated into proprietary programs (of which the GNU GPL does not allow). More on that in this article: Why you shouldn't use the Lesser GPL for your next library.
And now, my opinion:
The more i think about the issue though, the more i think that there is no compelling reson to go open sourse right now (this of course may change). It seems that going open source would just complicate matters more (i.e. any library we want to use must be open source).
The advantage of open source is the ability to bring the general public in on the project in the vien of the more eyes the easier the problem. I think that we should consider open source again when we are closer to deciding whether or not we want to let other programmers in on the project in this way.
1. Unique root element
2. Case sensitive
3. Matching opening & closing tags
4. Correct nesting of elements
5. Attribute values in quotes
6. No repeating attributes
...and apperently if you follow this, all else in XML follows. This is what I have been told - I don't often use XML so I am a poor judge. What do you think?