Skip to main content

Home/ In-the-Clouds-with-SOA-XML-and-the-Open-Web/ Group items tagged cms

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Gary Edwards

Component Content Management in Practice - Meeting the Demands of the Most Complex Cont... - 0 views

  • Executive Summary As the market for content management technology continues to grow, so too do the ways in which organizations seek to use content management. What began as a market focused on web content management has grown to include document management, digital asset management, and records management. What has emerged along with this growth is a desire by vendors to provide a broad, enterprise-class platform of content management technology that can handle all kinds of content.
  •  
    Gilbane white paper on Content Management Systems. Covers evolution of CMS from paper to digital to web.
  •  
    Notice that most of the concepts discussed in the Gilbane white paper are implemented in the open source Daisy wiki/content management system, which is a new wave document assembly/management system specifically designed for producing large technical documents. http://cocoondev.org/daisy/features.html
Gary Edwards

HTML5, XHTML2, and the Future of the Web : Digital Web Magazine - 0 views

  • The fact that Internet Explorer doesn’t really support XHTML as XML in any way, and the problems XML can cause when not all tools in the authoring chain are XML tools, means that there has been little incentive for using XML on the web. This is compounded by search engines not indexing XHTML as XML documents; very few XHTML authoring tools for XML; very few CMS or blogging tools supporting XML correctly all the way from input through database to generation; and very few ad suppliers supporting XML. There is a little incentive if you want to allow MathML, SVG, and other XML applications to be interspersed inline in XHTML documents, but this use of XHTML as XML has found a very limited audience. XHTML2 is XML And therein lies the biggest problem. On top of all the concerns that web developers have about using XML for serving documents, XHTML2 adds another layer of complexity. It isn’t HTML 4.01 reformulated as XML; it’s a different but similar language, with added, removed, or modified semantics for many elements, and added or changed element vocabulary for many semantics. In many cases, the changes are steps in the right direction, but at the same time, XHTML2 was not built with web developers in mind. As an example, it doesn’t at all address the deficiencies of HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0 in the areas of interactivity, local storage, or script interactions.
  •  
    great article walking through the history of HTML, XHTML, and browsers. Summary is that HTML5 is the future. Good thinking, great arguments.
Gary Edwards

Three myths Microsoft tells Russia | The Open Road - The Business and Politics of Open ... - 0 views

  • Even so, we interoperate with Microsoft products, anyway, even without Microsoft's blessing. As just one example, which content collaboration/management system integrates most seamlessly with Microsoft Office? If you said, "Sharepoint," you would be wrong. The answer is Alfresco. Who has seamlessly integrated the Microsoft CIFS interface into a Java-based CMS? If you said, "Sharepoint," you would again be wrong. The answer, again, is "Alfresco."
  •  
    OSS Innovation and MS IPR :: OSS Interop vs. MS Interop :: OSS Profit vs. MS Profit
Gary Edwards

What's up at the OpenDocument Foundation? Linux.com - Wikipedia Link - 0 views

  • Re: Finally, the beef... Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 76.14.48.79] on November 12, 2007 11:32 PM XHTML + CSS is the base. Add XForms, SVG and SMiL where needed. Study the work being done on microformats. Like most modern portable XML file formats, the basic packages are those of content and presentation. In CDF speak, this is XHTML content and CSS as the portable presentation package. ODF and MS-OOXML both struggle with the legacy tradition of the presentation package being application specific. Meaning, the portability is limited to other applications that are either of the same version, or, share the same layout and rendering model so that the exchange of the presentation package is lossless.
    • Paul Merrell
       
      See also "Putting Andy Updegrove to Bed (without his supper)," http://www.universal-interop-council.org/node/4 for a thorough rebuttal of claims that the W3C Compound Document Formats and framework are not suitable for use in the office productivity software sector.
  •  
    The Wikipedia "OpenDocument Foundation" page is continually re edited, changing the factual truth to portray the Foundation in the worst light possible. Every time we try to repair the page to reflect the truth, the liars jump right back in. Is there a Wikipedia resolution for liies? Our facts can be verified by the five year history of the OASIS membership and ODF TC records that are public information. This anonymous post to Joe Barr's Linux.com article is perhaps the best explanation on the Web of why the Foundation choose CDF, and could not use ODF.Good explanation of MSOffice-OOXML and the MS Web-Stack :: MS Cloud.No mention of the December 2007 MSOffice SDK beta that provided us with that first all important glimpse of the MSOffice-OOXML <> XAML converter component. I take it the article comment was written before that most important discovery. XAML "fixed/flow" is an alternative to W3C/ISO XHTML-CSS and ISO PDF.
1 - 4 of 4
Showing 20 items per page