[Design] [Cosmo] 0.5 spec update
priscilla at osafoundation.org
Mon Oct 16 16:01:31 PDT 2006
I've updated the 0.5 spec and started to move some of the features to
the 0.6 spec. (Which I'm currently working on.)
Ted, please see my comments inline. Thanks, -Priscilla
On Sep 28, 2006, at 5:10 PM, Ted Leung wrote:
> In the section: "Scooby/Cosmo Merge -> Requirements" - most of
> these are implementation tasks, not really requirements, so we can
> probably just delete them. The one thing that I think ought to
> be in the section on the merge is a description of what the merged
> UI should look/work like
I think the UI merge and what it will look/work like will be worked
on for 0.6. In 0.5 it was specifically server side infrastructure of
the merge. I may need to ask for your input to the spec on the
> In the section: "Hibernate Integration" - the goals should include:
> - address scalability issues with Jackrabbit by using a
> relational database
> - address backup/restore features by leveraging relational
> database's dump/restore tools
> In the diagram for "Anonymous Access"
> - At the bottom of the box labelled "Cosmo UI", workflows A and
> C end with "Click on notification link. Desktop e-mail
> launches". Is the UI just left at the current page?
I updated the work flow and moved this feature to the Cosmo 0.6 spec.
There is no longer an option B, as Morgan had pointed out that is
not possible in his URL proposal: http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/
To answer your question, yes you would have the Cosmo UI up w/ a
dialog box and one would copy and past the link into iCal.
> - in the UI Details section, it would help the readability to
> have the graphics inline as opposed to linked to a separate file
When I can I will put the images in the spec to keep everything in
one place. In the meantime, if there are documents which are 20 pages
long, it just make sense to link them to download etc. In addition,
proposals and other technical documents which are written up on the
wiki, will also be linked from the spec.
> In the section "Notification -> Requirements" - there is no screen
> design, which should be there when we implement this -- this is
> less urgent because this feature is moving to 0.6
> - also there is a key requirement missing, which is that the
> user needs to be able to review the mail/notification that is sent,
> which is possible with an external e-mail client, but is not
> possible with a server-based mail/notification form, because the
> user may have been anonymous
Yes I believe Matthew had sent an email to the list about the two
I've taken this out of the 0.5 spec and moving it to 0.6. We were
going to address this issue with screen mock ups, for 0.6.
> In the "Managing Time-zone" section there are no screen mockups
Originally there were mockups for Scooby, it's probably out of date
now. For 0.5, there were only plans to work on the infrastructure for
time-zones, I didn't think there was a need for sceen mock ups. We'll
have mock ups when there is a plan to implement time-zones as a
whole. I've taken this feature out of the 0.5 spec and saving it for
a future spec, as we're probably not going to get to it for 0.6.
> In the "Managing Events -> Requirements" section, I found the big
> table to be confusing and had hard time associating its contents
> with the dialog box. I think that a visual of the dialog box that
> was tied to the table would help in this case.
Originally I needed to map out the differences between Chandler and
iCal, because there were some functionality which I didn't understand
in Chandler. I met with Matthew, Grant and Mimi to better understand
recurring events–the state map was just used as a guide line.
As for the visuals, I originally had visuals for this but noticed
some of the screen mock ups were not showing up when I sent out the
spec for review. There should be a visual of the dialog now.
> In the section "Managing Events -> Terminology" , the last
> paragraph sets out what I would call the tenets for the 0.5 release
> (at least until we changed them). I'd like to see the tenets for a
> release stated at the beginning of the spec for that release
> Is the "Code Design" intended to be the location for technical
> specs for the various features outline in this spec?
Yes. Or as it stands now links to the technical specs on the wiki
pages. In future I can make a link at the top to jump down to the
code design if needed.
> I'd remove all the stuff in the "Cuts" section.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Design