Deara
Teresa Choate Loriaux
 Managing Editor .
 
 My LADY for yours one intersting refferates for my labour of 11 years the complect sistematising , "in box-office cachets " for The energetical Medicine of the Principles of The Laws of Energetical; Life, EnergeticalWorld,of Energetical healths,and Super Diagnosis on verity complect senses of the frenche expressiones :
 
   "j'ai consulte ,mais jamais n-ai pas vu cette paciennte ,et ni disscute avec cette persone , et ....Toujours Rienne sans conversattions!"
For exemplifing of yours visit the speech informationes:
 
Ders Collegue Good Morning,
the intersting Informationes for my labour
with Best Regards ,... Cristian :

THE WRITING 2 / Letter 2.
   
This the First Message in World for one practical Sciences Medicine of Energetical Subliminary Embryologic Endocrine Thaumaturgic Physiopathological And Physiological Sense, This the most perfectionantted Consulting at Mental (mind) Power, effectuatted is!... i’am can not have anamnesthique: Never speech (not can one word,or speech – conversattione,addressate for my ! ) , precis and corect is! Durate, longeur at 8 minute is! at Diagnosis at distances, for imperative motivationnes! (Motivatted) .
 
 
 
The formule fast is! : i'am name initialles : ....M.J.... i'am have one consultatione FOR APRECIATED MY HEALTH SITUATIONES at your Mental power method,....THIS THE IMAGISTIC’S CALCAN METHOD ("avec jamais ne j'ai pas vu toujours rienne!") ! ....
 
 
This all, (!) RESULTATTED OF THE CONTACT OF THE INFORMATIONALITY BAGS AND CONECTTIONES OF CHANELS REALISATTED IS (!)
 
 
After 40 minutes or 1 hour par e – mail , i'am confirmattione yours precis diagnostic , superior at of the tomographie in tridimensionnalitye ,...
 
 In My labour ” in vivo” colaboratted with Tissue,...in MULTIPLE Sectionnes and of the fragments ,or with the fragmentationes at 2 mm. , (20000microni), for Citogeneticals, chromozomiales descripttiones: anatomical descriptiones, “in vivo” in present time, or antherior(retro) Time or futhure time( this the complicationes is !),...
 
 
In interdisciplinary Sense of complect comptorisated the modificationes of physiologie or lesional physiopathologie,”in mouvement”,and ethiological sense in REALY VERITY IN ADULT LIFE TIMES, OR IN CHILDREN TIMES, OR EMBRYOLOGICAL TIME,AGE IS (!) :
 
   With internal medicine, embryological speciality, with neurological descriptionnes in multiples section-immages (!), in Endocrinologie speciality, and Neuropsychiatrie COMPLECTATIONES,all for Sense GLOBAL and in final for the presenttationes of Health Status of paciente’s :
 
    The Physiological sense and Physiopathological story at initial embryonary Life a with the periodicitty of Age :
 
at Native Day, at 3 years age, 5years, pre-adolescences 16 -17 years, Adult periode,at 21years – 40 years at 60 years age (sectorized the ages in visualisated the all “troubles” manifestationes pathologicales , explicitates is!).
 
 
I'am presnt and Participationne at multi congresses : at Pisa in Italy in march - 2003, at Lyon France Endocrinology in avril 2003,at Florences februare - 2004 I.S.G.E (Gynecological Endocrinology) with 6 poster,... in future time at august-septembre at Lisbon PORTUGAL - 2004 at I.C.E., (international, Congress of Endocrinology) with 27 Poster – articles for Energetical Subliminar Embryologic Endocrine Thaumaturgic Medicine Scieneces,...all good is !
 
 
This the fragmentes with minus are an for moderne medicine !...
 
 OF COURSE... The energism medicale archaic, ancestral and rennascentist, most secret is!
 
Cristian Calcan , Energist – man , specialist of Internal Medicine in Buzau (city) , Romania , address : 26 Crisan, 5100, Buzau , Romania . E – mail address : calcan@buzau.ro and WEB , site : http://newendocrinology.buzau.ro
 
  This site at GOOGLE Motor ARE OF The Variantes of English , or The variante of Franche LANGUAGE or in deutch langague (most extensif and complects is at 21 page – files, representatted at large in world (!),...at address: ”NEW ENDOCRINOLOGY”... FOR 8 – 10 FILES at 90 ARTICLES ARE IN ENGLISH , FRANCHE OR ROUMANIAN LANGUE ! THE SPECIAL SISTEMATISATED OF FIRST IN WORLD ARE AN THE ENERGETICAL LAWS (!) AND THE ENERGETICAL LIFE ,...AND THE ENERGETICAL DATES OF Energetical World of this’s transformattiones of dynamical mouvies of Energeticales Sens,...at all Forms (biological and simple matter forms(!), AND PRE – MATTER physical MANIFESTATIONES in INCLUDING OF THE “EMOTIONALITIES” OR IN. COAGLUTINABILITIES , MODERN VARIANTES ,...OF ARCHAIC :
 
”MEDIETATIES”,..OR “IN. CORPORALES” Of representative greek Ancetres – PYTAGORA,or Assyrian culture of the typical concept of The “ME”(the similar of Medietaties ‘s Pytagora,...or Emotionalities’s Calcan ),The assyrian first is of the concepts-observationnes of the Energetical Life,... most ierarchical and real explicitates is (!),... Best representative !...
 
 
 
 ....OR EXCITE MOTOR, or M.S.N MOTOR, AT OR JAPANESE ATTAYO (BIGLOBE) , ADDRESS : “ New Endocrinology ” Research Center , Buzau , Romania .
 
                                                  ****
 
“THE DEFINITION OF THE DIAGNOSIS -IMAGISTIC -THERAPY SYSTEM (CALCAN) , ITS ROLE IN THE CONTEMPORARY MEDICAL WORLD, EXAMINATION OF THE DIFFERENCES BETWEN THIS INNOVATOR SYSTEM AND THE OTHER ACTUAL SYSTEMS AS CURRENT THERAPEUTICAL AND DIAGNOSIS MODALITIES .”
 

Calcan Cristian ,Calcan Mariana ,”NEW ENDOCRINOLOGY”
 
Research Center, Buzau, Romania .
 

 Systems used for a long time in medical practice :
 

1./ Modern and traditional Allopathic Medical system.
 
2./Homeopathist system practiced by naturistic medicine and Shamanist medicine - also called system of Bioenergy,
 
3./and the other tradition al acupuncturistic system of bioenergy-(Daoist).
 

 Convergences,divergences,connotations about common points of suporting or about
 
antagonistic points/aspects,their precisely knowing in order to circumscribe the innovator element of “The Energetical Informational Calcan System” of investigation and anatomo – physiologic - physiopathologic describing .
 

The particularties of the examination comes from acceding of epical valences which are memorizing the elements of time with a quasi-oracular explicit and explanatory content arrived momentary( by dematerialisation of time and breaking the informational links compressed in snapshoting epic ).
 

The diagnosis becomes a functional diagnosis and also an anatomical-visualised diagnosis, motivational or energetical descriptive...and its unique character is that it does not accept incipient anamnestic informations from any source which could establish distortions of informalization as a proper mechanism of evaluation .
 

This method of consultation receive functional disturbing of the organs and tissues from an incipient stage, with a long time before the apparence of visceral organic lesions which could appear for a white,aproximaively 6-8-16 months after,( moments about modern imagistic can not relate because the lesion does not exist yet and so it is in the sphere of the medical errors),
 

By considering them in the theoretical aspects of the taumaturgic functions of the teams of embryologic endocrine glands and Vascular Artesian communicating(of Communicating Vessels)and Vascular Cross-roads,which assume the passing of the pathologization from ordinary Parenchymatos Organs, especially Vital organs,..to Cavitary Organs in a relative temporary chronicization...
 

 which could develop to delay,cure or even overpass this stage and passing to the Cavitary Organs, now very affected, even to Vital Parenchymatos Organs which were avoided previously, aven obtaining a chanzing of the from of pathological echo .
 

The status of energetical subliminarity about becoming aware, explaining the fact that at this stage symptomatology is difuse and imprecisley ,and modern allopathic diagnosis has an imprecisely character, without an object,its function can not obtain any imagistic role, but the traces of a bird’s fly in the air.
 
                                               **
 
       For The ISGE Congress Florence febr 2004, the ICE august Lisbon2004
 
    Authors:dr.CalcanS.Cristian,dr..Calcan I. Mariana ,”New Endocrinology ”Research Center
 
   ,Buzau,Romania .
 
       Adress:dr.Calcan Cristian,26 Crisan,5100(cod),Buzau,Romania
 
       Phone: +40.238.715.778 Fax:+40. 238. 717.718
 
       E-mail:calcan@buzau.ro
                                        **
THE SUPREM SYMBOL, ITS FORCE...IN THE CONTINUITY OFTHE PROCREATI- ON PERMANENCE! THE SUPREME SYMBOL IS THE BEING WHO GROWS IN THE WOMB THAT SHELTERS IT! ITS FORCE IS THE FORCE OF THE UNIQUE GIFT(!) OFFERED FOR OUR COGNITION,FOR ALL OF US !”
 

Calcan Cristian, Mariana Calcan,”NEW ENDOCRINOLOGY”,R C .Buzau,Romania.Districtual Hospital
 
 
The Supreme Symbol is the being who grows in the womb that shelters it! Its force is thw force of the unique gift(!) offered for ur Cognition,for all of us!The supreme force impresses because it keeps the keys of the Conception,the similar formation and the grows an the model of our parents and our forerunners.With these keys take forms the Embryonic Formations begun and continued since the age first day to 8 -14weeks old.
 
 
”The Continuity of the Procreation Permanently” ! in permanent Functionall Similitude, and less Morphological ! Its Persistence! the likeness of Product of the Conception, similar to the Parents, the related Forbears : the Creative Force the one of the product of the Creation, the force a creation similar to what was,it is the exploding essence of the eternal Miracle(!),Universal Biological.
 
 
It is its mouvement, it is the one who gives birth,the one that,like a goddess,has for mission to start the growth as an incarnation, by the creation,grain with grain, since the Embryo !
 
 
The one who gives birth is the one who is born in that who will give birth,definedby the work of accumulation white raising its Creations, It is a Symbol by what it will make: it gives birth and it is born; It is the one that accumulates carefully to grow in:
 
 
”The one who was grown”,will be similar to the Ancient Creatives,Those who are not anymore,the Forbears,being able to-give Birth to a new Mother?! ”The one who was grown” will resemble to its makers,nearly pushing it to become pregnant,and by collaborating, of good will, to be born as a Woman who gives Birth of a Virgin.As chanzing her Virgin’s Functions ,with a Mother’s Energetical Functions.
 
 
Its Force ...is the Force of the Unique gift!affered for our Cognition universal biological the one that , like a goddess by the work of accumulation(Perpetuum) ....by the multiple creation of harmonies(waters-baby-energies),in time,in the spacing,in the absorption,sorption insorption,in the unit of Cognition.
 
 
”The one who was grown”will resemble to its makers in order to become capabl e of giving birth to a Mother, nearly pushing it to become pregnant, and of good will.( The man doesn’t know changes of functions, not being a pillar of the Universe ).
 
                                             ***
 
...registretted of the Capitol for Reproduction:the Miracle universal and biological, embrionic life with his contributiones for transformations at Virgin functions ( with the artesian’s functions closed) in Birth woman (with the artesian’s functions open temporarlly),
 
This is embrionic,foetus function’s, the symbol suprem of the unique force universal energetical harmonizing the dinamics energetical mouvements creational of Cosmos.(of the Medietaties , the in.corporeals is of Pytagora at Crotona ,Italy)
 
                                                 **

> Alas, I see that Figure 10 (the poorly resized one)
> is as ugly as ever..

Fixed!

- Jon

In case anyone bookmarked this QuickTopic and wondered where the source article went (software-carpentry.codesourcery.com is gone), look here:

http://udell.roninhouse.com/GroupwareReport.html

Alas, I see that Figure 10 (the poorly resized one) is as ugly as ever...

Edited by author 01-28-2002 11:51 PM
Hi,

Thanks for the piece.

I'm curious if anyone has yet tried de3, http://d3e.open.ac.uk/index.html, the digital document discourse environment. It seems to have a gorgeous interface, and tools for promoting both course-grained and fine-grained discussion of a document. I believe it was developed originally to encourage discussion of online journal articles, and is now being promoted more broadly. The developers have added some crit-like capabilites of commenting on any web-page, though if I understand it correctly (the test-site is down) the annotations will only be visible to people who are pre-invited. It might be very useful for pre-defined teams.

I think crit.org is a work of genius (thanks Ping!). I'm mystified that it hasn't received the credit, popularity, and ubiquity it deserves.

I hope that amaya and annotea via the w3c.org might make crit type capabilities better known and more ubiquitous, though I don't know much about them.

By the way, I found some of the posts here to be fascinating, but the un-structured nature of this forum confusing.

Thanks Again,
Sam

I still miss the option of creating narrow endpoints for my links. If I want to include a link to a specific paragraph or sentence, then what (see crit.org for a solution).

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#13

dsf

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#71

Does anyone know of any efforts underway to reorganize Usenet along the lines that Jon Udell presents in section 2.1.1 (e.g., messages never expire; persistent URl namespace for messages)?

(I use dejanews to have a persistent URL namespace.)

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#26

HyperTeX seems like a notable step in this direction, though perhaps an interrim one:
 http://arXiv.org/hypertex/

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#27

well www.timedance.com is now nolonger available

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#29

TimeDance is no longer available. See their website.

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#26

1. The final result of TeX article is PDF
2. PDF can be integrated into web quite well just after U install AdobeAcrobat Reader

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#12

I don't see any particular need to mention it here. If they used to block this particular kind of access it is their decision. Equally, if they decided to unplug PC from the network cable,....

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...pware/report.html#8

hmm..I wounder why author says "Web's native HTML format". HTML format is just one of the formats. To my taste PDF is as native as HTML. Or I misunderstood the meaning of the web from the very beginning? The Web as author introduced it in the very beginning is used as synonim for Internet. May be it has sense to distinguish this two things? BTW, modern PDF with hyperlinking abilities is in some sense better than HTML.....

Andrew Appel (Princeton) did an interesting paper a few years ago on his experiences running a large journal via email; it is available on-line (compressed PostScript) at:

http://ncstrl.cs.princeton.edu/expand.php3?id=TR-494-95

Greg

Greg Wilson wrote:

>Regarding "criticons" (the use of symbols like [+], [?],
>and so on to indicate message type/content): if the world
>was using rich mail content, would we attach real icons
>(stop signs, smily faces, etc.) to messages, just as we
>used to put colored tabs on folders and documents, or would
>most of us not have the necessary self-discipline?

I'd like to think that it often wouldn't require much self-discipline, because the messaging tool simply invites and encourages us to specify semantic metadata conveying things like:

- I am making a request for an appointment on a date.

- I am promising to perform a task for person x, as part of project y, to be done by date z, and will require resource r.

- I am agreeing with your idea.

In other words, it is aware of various types of common "speech acts." I borrow this term from the realms of philosophy of language, and literary criticism. To tell the truth, I have never been able to figure out exactly what people mean by speech act theory. Very possibly it is just academic mumbo-jumbo. But what I take from the little I've read is the idea that speech acts are basic types of communications (requests, promises, commands, etc.) uttered in hopes of influencing listeners in specific ways.

To me there would seem to be great value in having our communication tools know about, and make explicit, a basic repertoire of speech acts.

Criticons are an example of this idea. I think in the end it will turn out that so much of our routine communication is categorizable in this way, that it makes sense to look for explicit tool support to aid in the expression of speech acts, rather than just relying on convention.

With explicit support comes dependable structure that you can actually do something with -- thus, when your message is a Request for an Appointment on a Date, my software can consult my calendar and respond appropriately, or at least automatically formulate a proposed response for me to approve or modify.

- Jon

Regarding "criticons" (the use of symbols like [+], [?], and so on to indicate message type/content): if the world was using rich mail content, would we attach real icons (stop signs, smily faces, etc.) to messages, just as we used to put colored tabs on folders and documents, or would most of us not have the necessary self-discipline? What if mailers (like Eudora) *always* attached icons to messages, but allowed us to choose an alternative? (I have visions of corporate logos attached to email messages, like the logos that now appear in the Internet Explorer "Favorites" list for some sites...)

**Steve** in your #34: "Instead of using mid-sentence links like http://www.tbtf.com, Keith Dawson (of TBTF) uses references like [1], and includes the link at the bottom of the message. I think he first introduced this in his newsletter."

FWIW :-) I find this "un-webby." Scholarly yes, but if I want immediate gratification [XYZZY] to find what [1] actually means, I have to interrupt my train of thought, scroll down to find [1] and then go thru it. Don't get me wrong I like the notion of a reference/bibliography list just fine (having compiled too many of 'em for too many theses/publications) but it's a bit too heavyweight for me these daze. At _least,_ hyperize the [1] for Type A mouse-holders like me.

Which then leads me to the question of what sort of hyperlink...

Part of the thought behind this type of convention might be the common webmaster issue where if you provide an in-text link, the reader may just click away and never see the rest of the site's deathless prose (and banner-ads). That's why I urge others to consider doing what I practice myself: providing in-line external linx that open in another TARGET="foo" window. If the other window always has the same name, then the alternate info can be perused and then you switch windows back, presto, more deathless prose. That's the way that Steve Yost does it here in QT. More confusing to the newbie perhaps, but ultimately more efficient for the aficionado and eyeball-retentive imho.

MSIE allows a link to be opened in a new window (right-click instead of left-click) but that takes me a few silly milliseconds longer every time, which grates (instant gratification, _q.v._ above)... so I find myself wondering why the HECK search engines like AltaVista persist in offering their hundreds of hits in same- rather than in new-window mode.

[XYZZY] ==> As someone said apropos of the "Is it legal to link into someone else's website's content?" debate: "Cicking on links is what we DO!"

Edited by author 08-08-2000 10:56 PM
**Jon**, I agree with your & Ka-Ping Yee's point about usage conventions, and have 2 more supporting examples:

1. Instead of using mid-sentence links like http://www.tbtf.com, Keith Dawson (of TBTF) uses references like [1], and includes the link at the bottom of the message. I think he first introduced this in his newsletter.

2. Julianne Chatelain introduced a Quick Topic convention in its early beta days: when replying to a specific person's message, quote their name with asterisks so it stands out. (She said "In the 'zine world we call this 'facilitating ego scanning.'")

These conventions caught on readily in various circles.

[1] http://www.tbtf.com

Alex Samuel wrote:

> Most of the best
> programmers I know are subscribed to dozens of e-mail
> lists, receive scores or hundreds of e-mail messages a
> day, and send dozens more. The time devoted to each of
> these is necessarily small.

If the digests of those mailing lists were usefully
scannable, how much time might be saved? More, I'd
argue, than the time expended to label those messages
descriptively.

In this vein, I've been thinking about something Ka-Ping Yee wrote. It was in email, but I don't think he'll mind me quoting it here:

> Conversely (also a bit of a surprise) i've discovered
> that people perceive a win when they use criticons

by "criticons" he means "(a convention of little
typographic symbols: [+] [-] [?] [#])" used to
indicate the type of a message (confirmation, refutation,
question, etc.)

> After i
> introduced the convention, people liked it and picked
> it up pretty easily and understood what it meant.

In other words, people don't naturally tend to develop a useful new habits. But when shown one, they may pick it up -- if it is not too different from existing practice, and not too time-consuming. I think descriptive titling falls into this category, though very likely I'm wrong because few people seem to agree that it does :-)

All this notwithstanding, I also think that the role of a "list guide" as mentioned in the report, coupled with a way of connecting that guide's summaries to the RSS network (or something very like it) is going to be an increasingly necessary way for people to follow what happens on lists. Certainly a key service provided by a list guide is descriptive titling and blurbing.


- Jon

Integrating documents with services

Ka-Ping Yee wrote:

> The way you've integrated your specially-processed
> document with the QuickTopic service is very clever.

Actually, I've done the same kind of thing using NNTP as the discussion service, and could do it as well with anything offering a reasonable Internet API.

When there's no guesswork or special effort involved in parsing the document, it's rather trivial to integrate the document with any kind of service.

It's not the processing of the document that's special, in my view, but the *ability to process* the document. So what's special, in this case, is that I wrote the document in well-formed XHTML, making it trivial to parse.

This is one reason why I think it's a priority to be able to use writing tools that think natively in terms of well-formed (and possibly valid) content. Then, a whole range of ways to integrate docs with services -- revision management, collaboration, etc. -- become easily available.

- Jon

Jon Udell wrote,

> Perhaps. Doesn't it seem odd, though, that programmers --
> who instinctively try to structure their programs, and
> assign meaningful names to classes, functions, and
> variables, would not want to carry the same discipline
> into the messaging realm?

Not so odd, perhaps. For one thing most of the best
programmers I know are subscribed to dozens of e-mail lists,
receive scores or hundreds of e-mail messages a day, and
send dozens more. The time devoted to each of these is
necessarily small. (That's why tools are important!)

Source code is something that lives on, and therefore
programmers naturally feel that it warrants careful
attention. Messaging, groupware tools like this one
notwithstanding, is perceived as something transient.
Programmers format their code more carefully than their
mail headers for the same reason people don't observe the
more formal rules of written language when they're speaking.
If you want to change this, the first task is to
convince programmers that their messages carry as much
information as their code, and therefore have as much
long-term value.

Good news: crit.org is back up.

> I guess the real message, though, is that given a
> commenting mechanism -- of whatever flavor -- such
> omissions can be rectified.

True. Are you continuing to revise the original document?
Its title is numbered "Draft #3", so i got the impression
it was a work in progress.

> This mechanism has, however, been extremely helpful
> as a way to collect, in one place, a bunch of things
> that would want to get woven into a next version of
> the report.

Right. The way you've integrated your specially-processed
document with the QuickTopic service is very clever.

> In CritLink, how often have you run into parsing
> problems when handed random web pages? What kind
> of parser are you using?

The most common parsing problem arises from abuse of
HTML comments. (Actually, i think this is the only
kind of parsing problem i've come across.) Unfortunately,
invalid comments like <!------------------> are all
too frequently seen.

The parser is homegrown (actually it doesn't really qualify
as a parser -- it's merely a lexer, as it only outputs a
stream of tokens), and most of the effort in writing it was
indeed expended in trying to come up with acceptable
heuristics for handling bad comments. But it's still
quite small.

> Perhaps. Doesn't it seem odd, though, that
> programmers -- who instinctively try to
> structure their programs, and assign meaningful
> names to classes, functions, and variables, would
> not want to carry the same discipline into the
> messaging realm?

Ah... but programmers are lazy! Like all humans, they
will take the easy way out when one is available. Some
have argued that programmers are among the laziest,
since we're always working so hard to get computers to
do our work for us. :)

Yeah, i bet a group of programmers might have slightly
better mail-composing habits, but on the whole i think
it's hard to get people to change their ways. (When
writing programs, there is a compiler to enforce certain
kinds of clarity -- with e-mail, there is no such
enforcement.)

As a result of common practice, the subject line has grown
to have a purpose of its own; perhaps an unfortunate one,
but it has one: the subject line has become the *thread*
label, not the message label. If indexing tools treat the
Subject line as a thread title rather than a message title,
and look in the content for a better message overview, i
think they'll end up with better results.


-- ?!ng

Ka-Ping Yee wrote:

> My future plans for Crit definitely
> include a facility for seeing an overview of the
> comments on a page, as that's clearly a current
> weakness.

I see that you do, however, offer a Wiki-style "recent changes" page:

http://www.lfw.org:8080/recent.cgi

It doesn't look too hard to correlate these fragments to the docs they relate to.

- Jon

Ka-Ping Yee wrote:

> I was surprised that you didn't mention Crit, as
> it provides exactly the kind of annotation
> facility which you have clearly worked hard to
> construct for your document. In particular Crit's
> strength is its ability to permit annotation on
> any Web document at all, so i think it deserves
> mention.

You're right, that was an unfortunate omission -- which several people have already pointed out here.

I guess the real message, though, is that given a commenting mechanism -- of whatever flavor -- such omissions can be rectified.

As you point out elsewhere, a commenting system ought to be able to indicate the existence of comments, as the one I'm using here does not.

This mechanism has, however, been extremely helpful as a way to collect, in one place, a bunch of things that would want to get woven into a next version of the report.

> Unfortunately crit.org is temporarily down.

I've been wondering about that...

> a running server at http://www.lfw.org:8080/
> You can use the server to make annotations on any web
> document

Excellent!

> I can see that although what you've done
> required some special processing work on your
> report, it has paid off in providing a
> particularly nice interface -- the subtle
> paragraph numbers (though they don't show whether
> any comments are attached or not)

Yes, that part is clearly suboptimal, good point.

In CritLink, how often have you run into parsing problems when handed random web pages? What kind of parser are you using?

> i think it may be a lost cause to
> try to convince people to always rewrite more
> meaningful subjects

Perhaps. Doesn't it seem odd, though, that programmers -- who instinctively try to structure their programs, and assign meaningful names to classes, functions, and variables, would not want to carry the same discipline into the messaging realm?

- Jon

Unfortunately crit.org is temporarily down.

You can get the source code for CritLink at

    http://www.lfw.org/ping/crit-0.9.2.tar.gz

or play with a running server at

    http://www.lfw.org:8080/

You can use the server to make annotations on any web
document, including Jon's paper, for example:

    http://www.lfw.org:8080/http://software-ca...oupware/report.html


-- ?!ng

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#56

In response to your dramatic and effective
illustration of the "Re: syndrome", as you
call it, i'd like to suggest an idea for
threading messages that popped into my head
way back in late 1998. It still awaits an
implementation, and sadly i haven't had time
to write one yet though i've been dying to
try it.

The idea is best illustrated by the mock-up
page that i put together then, using messages
taken from a real e-mail discussion list.
Have a look:

    http://www.lfw.org/ping/criticons/

Content is threaded at the paragraph level
rather than the message level, since paragraphs
are the chunks in which people more commonly
organize their thoughts. Subject lines are
ignored (as i think it may be a lost cause to
try to convince people to always rewrite more
meaningful subjects) -- instead, the topic
sentences of the paragraph are used.

And -- almost magically -- the index of the
content reads like a neatly summarized
conversation outlining all the positions in
the discussion!

I can't wait to build this tool.


-- ?!ng

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#220

Hi, Jon. Thanks for the report -- it's a great
summary of many of the various issues surrounding
collaboration. It's a pretty huge space.

I was surprised that you didn't mention Crit, as
it provides exactly the kind of annotation
facility which you have clearly worked hard to
construct for your document. In particular Crit's
strength is its ability to permit annotation on
any Web document at all, so i think it deserves
mention. I can see that although what you've done
required some special processing work on your
report, it has paid off in providing a
particularly nice interface -- the subtle
paragraph numbers (though they don't show whether
any comments are attached or not) and the really
nice view of the entire discussion forum.

Regarding the granularity of the annotations,
the earliest incarnation of Crit (before it had
that name) actually did attach small buttons at
the end of each sentence, with different-coloured
buttons if annotations were present. Later demand
for finer control led to the current system which
lets you attach a comment to any specific sequence
of words. My future plans for Crit definitely
include a facility for seeing an overview of the
comments on a page, as that's clearly a current
weakness.

Anyway, if you feel like saying something about
Crit in your report, that would be pretty cool.

-- ?!ng

A comment, via email, from Evan Williams, president of Pyra, maker of Blogger. I've interspersed some comments.

> Excellent report, Jon.
>
> About the weblog/Blogger point, however, I must offer a
> clarification, as well as a refutation.
>
> Disclaimer: I'm the president of Pyra (makers of Blogger).
>
> First, Blogger is not really a portal. It's a publishing
> tool. It links to 3,300 of the 10,000 or so (active) sites
> that are published with Blogger, so it has a portal-like
> aspect. But, primarily, it's a web application that
> automates posting to weblogs -- as well as "what's new"
> pages, journals, or any other page with a format of
> (usually) short, chronologically arranged posts.
>
> Speaking of which, this *format* is really what
> weblogging, or blogging, is about. Despite the prevalent
> definition of
> weblogs as "links" pages, if one actually looks around at
> what's being published on blogs, they will find not only
> links and commentary, but news, diaries, photos, poetry,
> mini-essays, project updates, even fiction. What's
> consistent -- and unique to the format -- is a simple,
> approachable, and -- with tools such as Blogger, GrokSoup,
> Manila, and Pitas -- extremely convenient way to publish
> information to one's own web space at the "chunk" or
> paragraph level, versus the page, which requires much more
> complexity and overhead.
>
> This low-friction method to getting thoughts onto the web
> has opened the floodgates to all kinds of publishing and
> communication that never would have happened before. And
> it's the reason that weblogs (in the way I'm defining
> them) are not, I believe, a passing fad. This format
> simply makes sense for certain types of content. Granted,
> a lot of what is suddenly being published is mediocre at
> best. But this is irrelevant. Actually, it's good! As
> with any medium, there's not likely to be great stuff
> without a lot of bad.
>
> I'm surprised to see you quote an anti-weblog argument
> that is so obviously illogical. To imply that those who
> use weblogs for "self-gratification and self-absorption"
> reduce the ability of others to use them for "reaching
> out and connecting with the world" makes no more sense
> than saying that all the amateur pages at GeoCities spoil
> the potential of the web. Or, for that matter, that dime
> store pulp novels somehow take away from what's possible
> with books.

A good point. What I meant is that blogging is as susceptible to abuse as any other mechanism allowing public graffiti, such as Usenet.

What I think may be a passing fad is the sort of communication one sees when weblogs are trying to achieve global scope. What I believe, and hope, is not a passing fad is the more focused kinds of communication that weblogs can enable within like-minded interest groups, and among such groups.
 
> The difference that saves blogs from the fate of Usenet is
> that, well, this is the web, if you don't like something,
> fortunately, you don't have to look at it.

And I would argue the same holds for NNTP technology, as distinct from the Usenet. What has poisoned our perception of the Usenet is its global manifestation. But NNTP technology, like weblogging, can and should be deployed at a variety of scopes. In more private scopes, both technologies can produce dramatically different results than we see when the scope is public and global.
 
> Lastly, I think you're overlooking one of the most
> compelling uses of weblogs -- one that is directly
> applicable to your main topic: collaboration. Private,
> collaborative weblogs, where a small group can post news,
> links, announcements, status updates, etc about a project,
> event, or other topic of mutual interest are extremely
> useful and simple tools for collaboration. They're not
> perfect for everything, but having a single, non-threaded,
> easy-to-update page as the focal point for communication
> among a small group has unique advantages over the other
> tools you mentioned as alternatives to email for group
> discussion. Many small companies and project teams are
> using Blogger (and probably other tools) for this purpose
> currently, and it's an idea that's catching on. We
> installed an enterprise version of Blogger inside Cisco
> for this purpose just yesterday.

If I failed to make this point specifically w/respect to Blogger, than I apologize. This is exactly how I recommend people should use Blogger, or Manila, or Wiki, or NNTP, or any group messaging technology.
 
> Blogs have more potential than most people think. You
> should try 'em out. :)

For years, I've been deeply involved in an ongoing conversation with a group of like-minded technologists. The medium happens to be NNTP/web discussion forums. But what happens in those forums is, to my way of thinking, the same kind of communication that weblogs enable. NNTP is, though rarely acknowledged as such, another way to "publish information to one's own web space at the "chunk" or paragraph level."

A comment via email from Wolfgang Appelt:

> I have read with great interest your excellent report
> "Internet Groupware for Scientific Collaboration". May
> I draw your attention to the BSCW System developed
> by GMD (http://bscw.gmd.de) which was specifically
> developed for scientific collaboration over the Internet.

Because the report was already much longer than planned, there were a number of groupware systems that I didn't mention. BSCW is one of them. It is noteworthy, though: a free service that supports discussion and shared pools of documents through a Web interface.

- Jon

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...pware/report.html#3

One pressing need is faster and continuous access to new ideas and critical feedback.

A comment, via email, from Andrew Shebanow:

> I liked your article, but noticed that all of the software
> you discuss isn't really interactively collaborative.

> Several companies, including the one I work for
> (PlaceWare), offer browser-based real-time meeting tools
> that would work very nicely for some types of scientific
> collaboration. You can give presentations, annotate on
> slides, take polls, type text, view web pages, or do
> screen sharing so that people can see you run your
> simulations.

> All provide free versions of their service, usually
> limitedto 3-6 participants, for people to try out.
> Here are some URLs to play with:

> http://myplaceware.com

> http://www.webex.com

> http://www.centranow.com

> Hope you find this info useful,

> Andrew Shebanow

Edited by author 08-03-2000 12:35 PM
in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#225

Great Article!

I'd like to see a sequel that touches on:
WWW Page authoring
www.everything2.com
Internet Relay Chat(irc)
Instant Messaging(especially odigo)
http://webapps.editthispage.com/
thirdvoice
http://www.gooey.com/

jtokash@homestead.com

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#27

Sadly, Timedancer isn't dancing, or has run out of time...

Anyone know the story?

Greg Wilson wrote:

> If XML really is going to be the "universal canvas",
> perhaps we should start thinking about
> how to write programs *on* that canvas, as well as
> *for* it?

No argument from me on that score :-)

FWIW, C# takes a (small) step in that direction:

public class MyClass {
   /// <remarks>MyMethod is a method in the MyClass class.
   /// <para>Here's how you could make a second
   /// paragraph in a description.
   /// <see cref="System.Console.WriteLine"/> for
   /// information about output statements.</para>
   /// <seealso cref="MyClass.Main"/>
   /// </remarks>
   public static void MyMethod(int Int1) {
   }

   public static void Main () {
   }
}

I personally find this horrid. Why not leverage the parse tree that's already going to be built for this, or any other language, and decorate that tree with comments?

Well, because we'd need writing tools to share that parse tree with the compiler at a deep level, and that's not an easy transition to make.

- Jon

Peter Lim wrote:

> people are now looking to add WebDav support into
> AOLserver (or _back_ into AOLserver.)

Interesting. Didn't know that -- thanks!

Back to the future, eh?

- Jon

Edited by author 08-02-2000 11:26 PM
Walter Ludwick wrote:

> I wonder why there is no mention of Pike
> When you speak of "limited support for Wiki-like
> automatic formatting," is this what you mean?

No, I mean things like auto-<p> (converting double newlines into HTML paragraph markers).

Pike's a horse of a different color -- an outliner that manages structured data, and can emit HTML. I consider it to be a bit of a special-purpose tool, though, not as universal as the basic Manila kit. Since (last time I checked) your Manila site has to connect back to Pike via XML-RPC, Pike tends to run into firewall/NAT resistance.

- Jon

Jason Reidy wrote:

> Remember that you're asking people with many other things
> to do to set aside some time and learn something which
> may or may not be around in a few years.

Actually, my wish is not to ask people to replace one obscure and arcane markup discipline with another. My wish is for the industry to deliver writing tools that support various requirements, including math, citations, etc., in ways that are transparently easy to learn -- and therefore irresistible -- but that at the same time yield valid, well-structured, and thus reusable content.

Until the industry delivers such tools, there's no reason to abandon TeX. Conversely, until users demand such tools, there's no reason for the industry to deliver them.

- Jon

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#134

I wonder why there is no mention of Pike in this paragraph (http://pikebeta.userland.com/ - a cross-platform outlining tool that updates Manila sites via XML-RPC).

When you speak of "limited support for Wiki-like automatic formatting," is this what you mean? That's a vague description, which doesn't adequately describe what Pike does, IMO.

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#168

Was TeX immediately picked up by everyone? Not that I recall (brief encounters while I was in jr. high in the mid-late 80s showed a smaller use than it currently has). Likewise, don't expect an immediate uptake of the latest and greatest.

Remember that you're asking people with many other things to do to set aside some time and learn something which may or may not be around in a few years. TeX had the defense of being completely and totally documented free software. It was also the only game in town for high-quality mathematical publishing.

The free part wasn't so much about liberty as permanence. TeX will be around for as long as the acid-free paper on which it's printed. And documents written in TeX will be decypherable. Start adding in a ton of extra packages and gizmos, and you start adding in problems. However, the wide availability of LaTeX and other macro packages pretty much guarantees their availability for at least a hundred years.

Consider how much _recent_ history has been lost when ISPs go under, projects fail, etc. Our great library of the Internet has a horrible retention policy...

Jason

Edited by author 08-02-2000 08:59 AM
in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#127

Several years, AOLserver/GNNserver/Naviserver had some of this same capability when used with the AOLpress browser/editor. AOLpress was a just-average browser, but you could edit web pages in the browser itself (not by opening another program, such as Netscape Composer). If you had the correct permissions on the AOLserver web server, you could save your pages or your changes back to the web server.

The current version of AOLserver, v3, has removed the capabilities (unfortunately) because most people didn't use them (as mentioned in your article, most people just look for information instead of contributing). Also, due to lack of interest, AOLpress is no longer being developed or supported, and because of licensing restrictions in some of the source code, AOLpress has not been open-sourced.

AOLserver, however, has been changed from restrictive licensing to Open Source with version 3, and people are now looking to add WebDav support into AOLserver (or _back_ into AOLserver.)

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#160

Reading the list of things that can't be done with equations on the web, I'm struck again by how web-hostile programs themselves are. No language I know of allows programmers to mark up source to support semantic search, embed anchors and links, and so on. Javadoc and Python doc strings are a good first step, but are very limited, language-specific, and completely unconstrained syntactically.

If XML really is going to be the "universal canvas", perhaps we should start thinking about how to write programs *on* that canvas, as well as *for* it?

Jon writes:

> The granularity of CritLink is, I think, at the level of
> elements or perhaps phrases? I can't access crit.org at
> the moment to check.

Yep, "phrase" level - you copy an excerpt you wish annotate, and the system brackets it in cute little glyphs (of different styles, conveying the nature of your comment). The glyphs use mouse-over bubbles to show an excerpt from the first comment - offhand, i suspect for scaling it should indicate the number of comments, etc.

Edited by author 07-31-2000 12:40 PM
CritLink, Loquacious, BooHoo

Thanks to both Monty and Ken for reminding me of CritLink, which I ought to have mentioned in the report.

Also noteworthy in this vein are some free services running at greenspun.com:

- Loquacious (http://www.greenspun.com/com/home.html), used to enable readers to add comments to a page linked to from one of your pages.

- Boohoo (http://www.greenspun.com/boohoo/index.tcl), used to enable readers to add "related links" to a page linked to from one of your pages.

The granularity of Loquacious/Boohoo is page-level.

The granularity of CritLink is, I think, at the level of elements or perhaps phrases? I can't access crit.org at the moment to check.

The technique used here works at the element level, which has advantages (can refer precisely to locations within a document) and disadvantages (requires special preparation). I personally think that such preparation shouldn't need to be special, it should just be an automatic consequence of using smarter writing tools that anticipate the possibility of granular interaction with the content when it goes online, and instrument the content accordingly.

- Jon

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#222

The computer security community has an open source technology (Ka Ping-Yee's CritLink) featured at crit.org which allows anyone to annotate html documents and start discussions, much like your annotation links on this document.

Monty

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#223

I've encountered a problem which may be impeding some people who otherwise would be submitting notes in your document. The popup submission window, at least in IE 5, is a bit too small so that he "post comment" button is scrolled off the screen - and there's no scroll bar to get to that point. Tabbing out of the comment box or mouse-dragging a select region to that point will expose it, but maybe some people give up before trying that...

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...are/report.html#110

My above mentioned Zope WikiNG proposal (comment 110 - i'm not sure, but i don't think i can cross reference it with a link, too bad) incorporates elaboration of security, notification, document structure and type, organization, and more. We see great possibilities in building on the Wiki approach.

http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/WikiNG

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#93

Funny you should mention this!-)

Digital Creations is looking seriously at integrating essential Wiki and Zope features in our content management framework to offer the kinds of things i see you discussing here. (I like the discussable web content arrangement you used to present your report! I'm even more drawn to the kind of thing Ka Ping Yee et al demonstrate at http://crit.org - we're hoping to offer this kind of thing.) See http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Proposals/WikiNG for a proposal about which i'm excited - we've not yet established if/when we're going to do this, but i'm quite excited about the prospect...

Edited by author 07-31-2000 10:16 AM
in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#28

I just tried invites.yahoo.com, www.evite.com, and www.timedance.com . As noted, timedance appears to be out of buisness. Accessing evite.com from IE 5 generates error messages. Only yahoo seems to be usable.

in reference to: http://software-carpentry.codesourcery.com...ware/report.html#29

TimeDance has shut down!

The day after I submitted the final version of this report, I mentioned TimeDance to an acquaintance, who went to the site and told me the service has been discontinued.

A shame. I don't know yet what the business reasons for the shutdown were. But the service, as described in my report, was a forward-thinking and useful groupware application.

This space is for discussion of the report entitled "Internet Groupware for Scientific Collaboration."