February 29, 2004
eForm Application for Gilbane Event
I have been promoting a session I will be moderating at the Gilbane Conference on Content Management in which representatives from Adobe, Microsoft, and the XForms community will explain and demonstrate their approaches to eForms development. As part of the session, each of the representatives will present their approach to a problem I present. In some brief back and forth so far, we have tentatively agreed on having each of them design an eForms-based questionnaire. To that end, I have been playing with a questionnaire about organizations use of, and need for, electronic forms. A very rough first draft follows. Any thoughts?
eForm Example Application
A Questionnaire About Using eForms
Information About the Respondent
Last Name
First Name
Title
Address 1
Address 2
City
State/Province
Country
Phone
Fax
Email
Information About the Organization
Name of the Organization
Type of Organization (Sole Proprietership/Corporation/Partnership/Government Agency, etc)
Business Sector: (Manufacturing, Engineering, Construction, etc.)
SIC Code (If known, 4 Digit Code)
Number of Physical Locations
Number of Employees
Annual Sales
Year Established
Information About the Use of Forms
Does your organization use forms for internal purposes (HR, benefits, etc.)
Does your company use forms for external purposes (customer or client contact, etc.)
Please estimate the number of internal forms used by your company (1-10, 11-50, 51-100, 101-250, 251-500, more than 500)
Please estimate the number of external forms used by your company (1-10, 11-50, 51-100, 101-250, 251-500, more than 500)
Has your organization begun to use electronic forms for any of these purposes?
What technology is your organization currently using for electronic forms? (Browser, PDF, Cardiff, Other Vendors)
Posted by Bill Trippe at 11:05 PM
February 28, 2004
The Future of Content Delivery: Services-Oriented Architectures now Available
The article I was researching and writing for Transform Magazine is now available online. To quote from the lead:
Approaches to software development come and go. Today's dominant approach gives way to the hot, emerging trend, and the cycle then repeats itself. When the dust settles, organizations still have much hard work left to make their systems and applications productive and efficient.
Web services, or, more broadly, service-oriented architectures (SOAs), are quickly becoming the dominant approach to software development and integration. SOAs are best understood as a method for integrating software as services, with networked software and content made available through standardized, XML-based mechanisms. In this approach, a software service can be easily and openly integrated with other services. As an example, you could flexibly tap into a software service that provides currency conversion, another one that translates text into other languages and another one that converts a document from one format to another.
The appeal of SOAs is consistent with the broader momentum toward the loose coupling of applications and data. As more organizations move content and applications out to the Web, software developers are pressed to find rapid, efficient means of bringing content and applications to the very thin client provided by browsers. Just as XML gave developers an open means of data transfer between applications, SOAs are giving developers an open means of having software communicate with and control other software over the Internet.
Posted by Bill Trippe at 3:37 PM
February 27, 2004
Updated Feature List for XML Editors
I have been working on the feature list for XML editors, which will be included in the upcoming report I am writing for CMSWatch. After some feedback from some initial respondents, I have revised it. This is by no means final. In fact, I am asking the respondents to add features as they see fit. My thanks to several reader who chimed in with ideas.
If you would like to see this in spreadsheet form, click here. I invited product folks from XML vendors to download and respond to the list. I can not guarantee that your results will get in the first version of the report, but they will get into future versions of the report.
For those of you reviewing the list in spreadsheet form, note that the yellow rows are those rows added since the first version.
Thanks,
Bill
Updated Feature List for XML Editors
OS Windows Mac Linux Solaris VALIDATION XML Validation SGML Validation DTD Support W3C Schema Support Relaxing Schema Support Namespace Support Xinclude XML Catalog Interactive Validation Batch Validation Edit/manage Entities Edit/manage CDATA Edit/manage Attributes Tag/Attribute help and support in context Support special characters and character entities Schematron Allow invalid but well formed Allow invalid and not well formed TABLES and MATH WYSIWYG CALS Tables WYSIWYG HTML Tables WYSIWYG MathML Editing EDITING INTERFACE WYSIWYG Editing Source View Editing Grid View editing* Tree view editing* Pretty printing of XML Syntax coloring Multiple Editing Windows Allow changing markup (elements too) * These both assume hierarchical editing support and one is typically offered instead of the other. EDITORIAL FEATURES Spell checking Grammar checking Collaboration features Versioning Document Compare Document Merge Search and Replace Search and Replace with Regular Expression Search and Replace with XML Context Multiple-level Undo/Redo PLUG-INS and SUPPORTING APPLICATIONS XSLT Engine XSL-FO Engine Raster Image Editing Raster Image Display Vector Image Display Vector Image Editing CUSTOMIZATION FEATURES Menus Macros Tool Bars Keyboard Shortcuts Forms/Interface Designer Customize based on schema/DTD in use Apply customizations to individual user Apply customizations to entire workgroup Apply customizations to entire organization DOM Interface included Web Services via SOAP, etc. BROWSER AND INTEGRATION SUPPORT ActiveX Java JavaScript HTTP PUT HTTP POST LOCALIZATION (Please list # of languages)
Localized Menus
Localized Documentation
Localized Error Messages
Dictionary/Spellchecking
Integration with Translation Systems
Language Support
Tag Aliases
Localized User Interface
Thesaurus, multiple languages
Online Help, multiple languages
Posted by Bill Trippe at 6:56 PM
February 26, 2004
Employing a Software Development Process in Content Management Projects
One of the the lists I subscribe to is for technical writers and others in the technical communication field (techwr-l@lists.raycomm.com). I responded to a posting today that asked the list to weigh in on how engineers and technical writers can effectively collaborate as software is developed. You can imagine the problems technical writers face as software hurtles through the development process; can the documentation keep pace with such change?
As I point out in my reply, the poster asked the question and answered it, at least in part, because his organization has already identified that they need a more orderly development process, perhaps something along the lines of ISO 9001.
It occurred to me that the advice for keeping technical communicators in step with software development is identical to advice I would give to keep any stakeholder in step with a CMS implementation project. I welcome your thoughts.
What a great question, and even better that you answered it yourself already, because the answer is "process." I have worked for two successful software companies where we redesigned our process to conform to something like ISO 9001 and the Capability Maturity Model for Software (CMM, see some background herehttp://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmm/cmm.html, and note also that CMM is being sunsetted in favor of CMMI (Capability Maturity Model Integration)).
A great deal has been written about such processes, but I would like to offer some highlights of what I learned from going through the process twice--once on the customer support side of the business (including training and documentation) and once on the software development side of the business.
The highlights for me were:
- There should be detailed specifications (including functional and design specifications) that are highly readable and meaningful to all interested parties (including documentation).
- Such specifications should be subject to regular and formal reviews by all interested parties.
- Such specifications should be under a rigorous and visible change control process. (We even went so far as to have the Director of Customer Support, which included training and documentation, be one of the signatures on an approved change.)
- The entire product development process should be managed in visible and meaningful phases, and that transitions from phase to phase should be an explicit event. Thus, you don't consider the product to be in design phase until the functional specifications have been approved (pretty obvious, yes, but not always honored).
- Perhaps most importantly, that the transition from one phase to another be subject to an official declaration that the project has reached a state of readiness to be at the next stage. And that this state of readiness be defined by a number of meaningful criteria. (For instance, for release out of the design phase, you could require that the GUI be frozen; for release to Alpha that the installation scripts and documentation be complete. Again, pretty obvious, but the details are important.)
There is more of course (and I would be happy to discuss off line), but I think these highlights suggest the gist of it, which is that the software development process be orderly, open, and visible, and (here is the key) that all interested parties are fully involved and fully empowered to help manage the process to ensure their own organization's success in the ultimate release and use of the product.
One more quick thought. If you haven't already, you might consider an outside consultant to help your organization with this process. In one case, we did it on our own, and it worked because we had a _very_ senior and excellent engineering team. In the other case, we were all pretty junior, and we hired an outside consultant who did an excellent job of "herding the cats," as they say.
Hope this helps, and as I said, I would be happy to discuss offline.
Posted by Bill Trippe at 10:02 PM | Comments (4)
February 12, 2004
First, do no Harm: Can Privacy and Advanced Information Technology Coexist?
The following is an article I wrote last year for EContent magazine that delves into some of the privacy issues raised by the growth in scope, depth, and power of database technology. While it specifically discusses medical privacy and the HIPAA act, its broader questions apply to many kinds of content and information.
Advances in networking and database technology have brought vast amounts of data together, and as search and querying technology improves, these vast stores of data become increasingly meaningful to even the casual user. In the right hands, such networked data and content can be invaluable--the doctor who needs vital patient records, the security analyst who wants to glean some intelligence from financial records. But for all its potential good use, the same data has great potential for misuse--either inadvertent or intentional. Mishaps have already happened and, while policies are in places (and new ones are soon to be implemented), the risk remains. Perhaps the real question then is to ask whether technology to preserve privacy can advance as quickly as the technology that seems to be putting privacy at risk.
In late December 2002, the U.S. Department of Defense reported that its efforts to computerize the medical records of military personnel were set back when hard drives containing the records of a half-million personnel were stolen. The records included names, social security numbers, and medical claims histories. According to the Associated Press, the Defense Department had seen the new computerized system "as a potential 'data gold mine' for military physicians and other healthcare professionals that will provide quick and easy access to military patient records worldwide."
While this is perhaps the most spectacular recent privacy breach, it is not the only one. According to news accounts, patient record information has been compromised at a major pharmaceutical chain, a health insurance company, and an online retailer of healthcare products, to name a few places. In each of these cases, the compromise has been inadvertent: in one case, information was emailed to the wrong parties and in another case-sensitive information was accidentally posted to a public Web site. But when these accidental disclosures are considered in light of the Defense Department theft and some well-publicized security breaches at ecommerce companies, the concern begins to grow.
Indeed, many would argue that, when it comes to medical records, any compromise is unacceptable and that every reasonable effort should be made to safeguard such data. To that end, the federal government is mandating the enforcement of new patient privacy rules under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). HIPAA is a broad law that called upon Congress to delineate what rights patients have to control their own medical information, and what procedures and mechanisms would be followed for appropriate sharing of that information. The result is a broad set of regulations to be followed by healthcare providers, insurers, and related organizations such as medical researchers--anyone who handles patient information.
PRIVACY IS FUNDAMENTAL
The assumption behind the protection of medical record information is that privacy is a fundamental right. In announcing the HIPAA regulations, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recognized that the new regulations would come at significant cost to the healthcare industry, but pointed out, "it is important not to lose sight of the inherent meaning of privacy: it speaks to our individual and collective freedom." While this may seem like lofty language, they cite the same basis many privacy organizations and advocates do--the Fourth Amendment guarantee that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."
To this end, HIPAA and regulations seek to control how patient information is collected, safeguarded, and used over time. The overarching requirement is in some ways obvious; only clinicians with a need to know-and to whom you have granted access-should have access to your medical information. But the actual implementation is complex, as more information is digitized, as more systems are interconnected, and as increasingly powerful tools for querying become available.
But the real tension between privacy and usefulness stems from the basic requirement for automating patient information in the first place--to give clinicians ready access to the information they need to make on-the-spot, critical decisions. "It's a balance between confidentiality and ease of use," notes Dr. John Halamka, who as both a practicing physician and CIO for a Boston-area hospital group has a comprehensive view of the problem. In describing the tools they have developed at CareGroup Health System, Halamka talked about "including knowledge in the workflow" for an application such as order entry. Halamka offered the example of a doctor who is prescribing a hypertension drug for a diabetic, where the doctor would ideally have the patient's latest lab results as well as recent and relevant research about the medication "in the context of taking the action."
Again, while the requirement is in some ways obvious, the implementation is likely complex. To begin with, doctors operate in an information-saturated world. Primary medical research alone is a deluge of information. Halamka points out that if doctors took time out "to read eight research articles a night, they would be 800 years behind after one year." To solve that problem, Halamka's technology team at CareGroup gives clinicians access to databases such as Uptodate.com, where experts in the field read, abstract, and summarize the world's literature.
Moreover, even an individual patient's record may be lengthy and complex, and, depending on the action being taken at a given time, the clinician likely needs selected information rather than every detail about that patient. Halamka notes that the same doctor prescribing a hypertension drug would indeed want recent lab results, but would likely not need to read a summary from a recent psychological visit.
The key, then, is to provide authorized clinicians with precisely the information they need, when they need it--but only the precise information they need, so that privacy is not compromised. In an environment such as CareGroup, which deals with 40 terabytes of patient information, such careful handling requires a team of 16 data analysts who provide the necessary views, reports, and query tools for the clinicians to use. Depending on the nature of the query, some reports would need to be stripped of identifying patient information, for example, and others might need to generalize the results so no specific patient information could be inferred. In addition, Halamka emphasized the tools "need to recognize roles and rights based on clinical needs." A query that is appropriate for one clinician to perform may not be appropriate for another. Halamka noted an emergency room doctor might need ready access to a broad set of patient information. The tools, Halamka continued, "should allow you to do your job while a lso protecting the patient."
IS TODAY'S TECHNOLOGY UP TO THE TASK?
Given the complexity of maintaining patient privacy in an increasingly digital world, it's reasonable to ask if the technology can support the requirement for privacy while also giving clinicians access to the information they need. Practitioners like Halamka would answer in the affirmative--"We do our very best with the tools we have"--but HIPAA compliance comes at a cost. (The Department of Health and Human Services estimates it will cost the industry $17 billion over ten years to implement the HIPAA privacy regulations.)
Some of the cost of HIPAA compliance is the human cost for the data curation work done at places like CareGroup. Other costs come as organizations integrate privacy software with patient record systems. At least one interested party, though, thinks the eventual solution to the patient privacy issue may involve a new approach to database technology itself. Researchers at IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose have been developing the technology behind Hippocratic Databases--databases that, according to IBM Fellow Dr. Rakesh Agrawal, support the primary mission of patient care while taking "responsibility for the data that they manage to prevent disclosure of private information."
Agrawal is widely recognized as a leading thinker in the field of datamining--the discovery of useful knowledge previously hidden in massive amounts of raw data--and has been writing about privacy issues for several years. Agrawal's idea of Hippocratic Databases presumes a system where "contracts" are created between databases and users to ensure the privacy and integrity of data. "This contract system is based on 10 principles," notes Agrawal, "including stipulations that the information will be kept accurate and up-to-date, the data is used solely for what it was specifically collected for, and the data is only retained for as long as it is needed."
FIRST, DO NO HARM
"Whatever, in connection with my professional practice or not, in connection with it, I see or hear, in the life of men, which ought not to be spoken of abroad, I will not divulge, as reckoning that all such should be kept secret."
--Hippocratic Oath
Agrawal's interest in privacy and databases stems from his long and serious work in datamining. At various times, datamining has been viewed as problematic because of potential privacy concerns, and the topic has been frequently discussed at conferences where Agrawal was a speaker. Attending a conference in 1995, Agrawal was struck by a question from the audience, "Can technologists change the attitude that we are not responsible for the consequences of technology?" Agrawal admits, "the question stuck with me," and it motivated him to keep thinking about this issue of privacy. In Spring 2002, Agrawal and several colleagues from IBM presented a paper, "Hippocratic Databases," at the 28th Annual VLDB Conference in Hong Kong.
"We saw it as a call to the industry," said Agrawal, and the paper's introduction said, "We suggest that the database community has an opportunity to play a central role in this crucial debate involving the most cherished of human freedoms by re-architecting our database systems to include responsibility for the privacy of data as a fundamental tenet." And while patient record information is the most obvious and important problem, Agrawal is well aware that privacy extends to many other areas--finance immediately comes to mind. "Five years from now," according to Agrawal, "information about animate things in databases will completely dwarf information about inanimate things." Moreover, Agrawal suggests the logic of managing this animate information is very different, and privacy is just one issue that presents technical challenges to today's databases.
The challenges begin with how privacy clashes with some of the fundamental benefits of a traditional database, such as concurrency and recall. Databases are very good at capturing and committing records, and then immediately making these records available in views, query results, and reports. But, as Agrawal suggests, Hippocratic databases likely require more emphasis on "consented sharing" than on concurrency.
There are database technologies in use today that support privacy, but Agrawal would argue that they either don't go far enough or they don't support the kind of use cases that Hippocratic databases require. Medical researchers, for example, rely on statistical databases to provide meaningful answers to statistical questions (average, maximum, minimum, etc.) without compromising sensitive information about individuals. Statistical databases use techniques such as restricting types of queries and "data perturbation"--where noise is added or selected values are swapped. While Hippocratic databases would benefit from some of these statistical techniques, Agrawal and his colleagues point out that Hippocratic databases will need to support a much broader set of queries and usage.
Security and encryption technologies are also increasingly in use with databases. Agrawal notes that databases can apply multiple levels of security to database items--e.g., top secret, secret, confidential, and so forth. To date, though, these techniques have been implemented in ways that can make query results uneven or inaccurate--a "top secret" query could leave "confidential" records unreported, for example. "Many of our architectural ideas about Hippocratic databases have been inspired by this [security] work," wrote Agrawal and his colleagues.
THE HIPPOCRATIC DATABASE
IBM's model for privacy-savvy databases may well have been inspired by the Hippocratic oath, but the principles of how to handle private information are broadly understood and articulated. Regulations in the United States and elsewhere in the world are largely based on the idea of "Fair Information Practices" These practices stem from the set of principles established in 1980 by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). While the OECD delineated eight principles (which many countries have used to develop legal guidelines for the collection and use of personal information), IBM's researchers cite ten, which cover how the data shall be used, disclosed, retained, and safeguarded.
Along with these principles, Agrawal and his colleagues offer a strawman design and a set of use cases for how Hippocratic databases could be tested. The response has been enthusiastic according to Agrawal, and has bolstered his conviction that, "We can build the datamining models while still preserving the privacy of individuals." For Agrawal, it's a case of "the promise of the technology versus the risk, and the technical community can help reduce the risk."
Posted by Bill Trippe at 7:57 PM
February 10, 2004
New eForms Technology to Take Center Stage at the Gilbane Content Management Conference as Microsoft, Adobe, & Cardiff to Debate Approaches
An expanded double conference session provides a moderated discussion on W3C's XForms, Microsoft's InfoPath, and Adobe's XML/PDF eForms technology
Cambridge, Mass., February 10, 2004. The Gilbane Report and Lighthouse Seminars announced a special expanded conference session on electronic forms at the Gilbane Conference on Content Management to be held at the Westin Bonaventure in Los Angeles, March 24-26, 2004.
"New eForms technologies promise to have a profound effect on information collection, integration, and collaboration" said Frank Gilbane, Conference Chair, "With Microsoft, Adobe, and eForms vendors all building more accessible interfaces to XML-based electronic forms, there will be a giant leap in the ability of both large and small enterprises and departments to easily implement forms based business solutions that integrate with other enterprise information systems. Businesses need to learn what these new technologies can do for them."
The special session, "Electronic Forms & Content Management" will be held Thursday March 25, 3:00 - 5:00pm and be moderated by Bill Trippe, Senior Editor, The Gilbane Report, and author of "Microsoft, Adobe & XForms to Shake Up Electronic Forms Market" (Gilbane Report Vol. 11, No 8, October 2003). Speakers include: Chuck Myers, Technology Strategist, Adobe; Micah Dubinko, Chief XML Architect, Cardiff Software; and Amber Kinney, Product Manager, InfoPath, Microsoft.
"eForms have a growing role beyond ECM, as they are emerging as the primary interface between people, processes and programs.", said Bill Trippe, Track Chair, and Moderator. "It is no accident that significant initiatives - Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, and the like - are forms-centric. There is a lot you need to pay attention to here. This session will help you understand the landscape of current capabilities and provide insight into what will be available soon."
The conference program is entirely focused on content management technologies, and includes 26 sessions and tutorials covering today's most critical issues for businesses planning or implementing a content management strategy.
Microsoft is the Platinum sponsor of the Gilbane Content Management Conference in Los Angeles. Gold sponsors include Vignette, Context Media, and GMC Software. Other sponsors include IDC, InfoWorld, eContent Magazine, CMSWatch, Transform Magazine, XML Journal, Web Services Journal, OASIS, IDEAlliance, OSCOM, WOW, and G-SAM. For a complete list of sponsors and exhibitors see wwwgilbane.com/CM_conference_sponsors_LA_04.html
For more information on the Gilbane Content Management Conference in LA see www.lighthouseseminars.com/gccminfo.html.
About Bluebill Advisors, The Gilbane Report
Bluebill Advisors, Inc. serves the content management community with publications, industry conferences and professional services. The Gilbane Report (www.gilbane.com) administers the Content Technology Works™ program disseminating best practices with partners Software AG, Sun Microsystems, Artesia Technologies, Atomz, Context Media, Convera, Vasont, Venetica, Vignette, and INSCI.
About Lighthouse Seminars
Lighthouse Seminars' events cover information technologies and "content technologies" in particular. These include content management of all types, digital asset management, document management, web content management, enterprise portals, enterprise search, web and multi-channel publishing, electronic forms, authoring, content and information integration, information architecture, and e-catalogs. http://www.lighthouseseminars.com
Posted by Bill Trippe at 2:03 PM
February 9, 2004
Who Should Manage your CMS?
The question came up recently--where in your organization should a CMS be managed? This particular client was not interested in an ASP model (which is an excellent one for some), but is raising the question of which group should manage a growing CMS implementation in a growing company.
I offered the following preliminary (and general) answer. Your mileage will vary.
1. The CMS software, repository, interfaces, and customized tools should be managed by a centralized technical organization that is resposible for other business applications (back office, ERP, etc.) It is risky to not have a group that specifically worries about the software and all the administravia that goes along with it (OS versions, database versions, upgrades, etc.)
2. The content of the CMS content and how it displays to its various audiences should then be controlled by those people who own the different communication products and different audiences. Thus, tech doc should own its sections, marketing its sections, and so on. Some organizations are very focused on branding (e.g., use of the corporate logo and name, colors, etc); in this case, a good CMS will allow templating of such items so that they can be easily controlled and administered by a central group.
Hope this helps, and I would be happy to discuss more, either here or offline.
Bill
btrippe@nmpub.com
Posted by Bill Trippe at 2:57 PM
February 5, 2004
Mellon Postdoctoral Research Fellow
I don't usually pass on things that appear elsewhere, but this looks like an excellent opportunity for someone, and also the sort of work that can further the use and understanding of technologies such as Digital Rights Management (DRM) and document policy management.
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
MELLON POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCH FELLOW
The Center for Intellectual Property (CIP) at University of Maryland
University College announces a two-year postdoctoral fellowship with a
stipend. Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the position is for
a recent PH.D. who is pursuing research on topics related to encryption,
intellectual property, and dissemination and protection of digital
information. The position will be directly involved with the Center's
research project on digital rights management (DRM) systems, higher
education, and intellectual property rights. Responsibilities include:
- Developing, testing, and analyzing research projects based on
application expertise and interest;
- Aiding in the development of a survey instrument, testing the
instrument and disseminating the instrument;
- Writing narrative summaries of the research results, and related tasks
under the supervision of the project directors;
- Conducting background research;
- Developing and implementing an evaluation plan and preparing progress
reports as needed for the Mellon Foundation and UMUC's executive
officers;
- Studying, testing, and maintaining accurate data on DRM systems
identified as relevant and/or best practice systems from research
results obtained through national studies;
- Designing and implementing training activities, both face-to-face and
online in intellectual property and digital rights management;
- Teaching one course per year, either face-to-face or online, and
publishing in peer-reviewed publications related to the focus of the
Center's research activities; and
- Performing other job-related duties as assigned.
QUALIFICATIONS: Successful applicant will have a Ph.D. degree (Or be
ABD) in computer science or a closely related field; will have excellent
oral and written communication skills; have demonstrated experience in
research and statistical analysis (SPSS preferred); and have experience
in completing and publishing research results. Applicants must submit
with application materials a three to five (3-5) page essay discussing
their purpose in pursuing this postdoctoral fellowship and how their
discipline expertise works symbiotically with the research conducted by
the CIP postdoctoral researcher.
POSITION AVAILABLE: Immediately. This is a 2-year appointment.
SALARY: $42,000 Stipend
TO APPLY: Submit a cover letter, curriculum vitae, names of three
professional references, a copy of any significant
publication, essay, along with salary history for last
three positions to:
Candidate Search - Postdoctoral Researcher (I000481)
Office of Distance Education and Lifelong Learning (ODELL)
University of Maryland University College
3501 University Boulevard East
Adephi, MD 20783
Or email all materials to: hrjobs@umuc.edu
Please contact with necessary information by February 14, 2004.
Posted by Bill Trippe at 5:17 PM
February 2, 2004
Here Lies Email, RIP
The signal-to-noise ratio for email reached an all-time low for me this weekend. Mydoom certainly did its part in this, especially since someone on a social mailing list to which I subscribe was infected, leading to scores of bogus messages per hour. I have basically four email addresses, two of which are "public," and then I administer four more emails for my primary domain. I use tools on the server side and the client side, and I still had over 700 bogus emails reach my inbox between Friday noon and Sunday evening. At one point, after not being online for a few hours, I logged on and downloaded 179 emails, not one of which had any value whatsoever.
How do larger organizations deal with this? And is anyone measuring the real economic impact of this? The costs begin with the server and storage costs, and the technical resources for managing the problematic sides of email. But then there is the loss of productivity for each user who must deal with problematic email that reaches them. Someone commented recently that each new filter and tool employed to deal with problem email raises expectations among end users, only to eventually disappoint and leave them even more frustrated then before.
Is the solution out there somewhere—and sometime soon?
Posted by Bill Trippe at 7:58 PM | Comments (2)
February 1, 2004
Would like to hear from experienced users of XML technology
I have been posting the following message to some XML-related newsgroups lately.
For some research and writing I am doing, I would like to hear from experienced users and technical implementors of the following commercial XML products (listing by vendor and not always by roduct):
ArborText Epic Editor
Corel XMLetal
Altova XMLSpy and Authentic
Ektron's eWebEditPro+XML
Ixiasoft TextML
Software AG Tamino
Ipedo's XML repository
Microsoft SQLServer (when used for storing XML)
Oracle (when used for storing XML)
Hypervision Worx
Hypervision Studio
CambridgeDocs XDoc Converter
Please contact me offline, and thanks very much.
Bill
-------------------------
Bill Trippe
New Millennium Publishing
763 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
781 526 2564
btrippe@nmpub.com
Posted by Bill Trippe at 8:26 PM
