At 09:30 AM 10/22/2001, Bernie Slepkov posted:
>I came to realize where I went wrong. I had thought that first I
>establish a topic, and then I upload a review document.
>Actually, QT and QTDR are separate. I have deleted the orphaned
>QT topic files I had no intention of initiating.

I see. What this misunderstanding reveals (to me at least) is that there perhaps needs to be a way to "spawn" a QTDR from a Topic, in a way similar to the way we now spawn new Topics from Topics. That is, one should be able to create a new QTDR and explicitly link it to the "parent topic." I know that Steve Y. was once subscribed to this topic so I wonder what he thinks of this notion.

>What I feel is terribly lacking (perhaps my inexerience with
>QTDR :\ is an ability of editing the uploaded document.

No offense, but as I understand things, QTDR is not for
"editing-web-pages-on-the-web-proper" (that's the province of certain specialized web-browsers-cum-editors, such as the still-experimental "Amaya" now being developed at the World-Wide Web Consortium in Cambridge).
QTDR is designed to solve a different problem -- to aid authors and editors who have a "latest version" of a doc-in-progress, and want to collect others' comments on their Mss. When it's ready for review, they can upload that "latest version" to the QTDR server and allow others to "mark it up" with comments (while not affecting the "latest version" -- which remains untouched in the author's hands). At any time they wish, they can close off new postings, and then consider which comments to "fold into" the next rev of the document, and how to write them in. And/or to take other many other actions they wish. Then they can upload the next rev, re-invite the reviewers, and so-on. Hope this brief characterization of the "problem being solved" helps put QTDR in perspective.

OBTW I'd be interested in any comments you (or other Topic readers) might have in my Topic "QTDR (of others' Mss) and Copyright: any issues?" which is at http://www.quicktopic.com/9/H/mEqSXb2tCWSZ . TIA if you're interested.
>Thanks for the heads-up on Seth. I'll email him shortly.

Clue me in on how that goes, please. I've often thought that his writings, to which he distributes pointers to many in hopes of eliciting comments, are apt for QTDR. I believe that QTDR is an excellent
community-of-ideas-building tool -- which is why I was hoping to connect you to him.

>That I have connected with individuals involved with the
>Internet's beginnings is exciting, given my own obsessions with
>it - the net that is. I have driven myself to distraction trying
>to create prototype webpage designs, but am reaching the limit
>of my patience regarding their limitations.
>
>Might I ask what your interest/involvement with QT/QTDR lie?

Independent informal volunteer consultant. I met Steve Yost a couple years back, thru an email-distro list run by a mutual friend. I've been interested in groupware since the crudest form of it -- email -- was invented by a friend of mine at BBN, and he showed it to me the day afterward. I've followed that thru email distro-lists, USENET, archived email-lists, pre-web groupware (e.g., DECnotes) and then had the fun of helping to accelerate the plethora of web groupware. Steve's creation caught my attention because even in its earliest form it was the most creative amalgam of web and email I'd ever seen -- and the simplest to use. I began consulting (on user experience, functionality and QA) and evangelizing it. Why? because I've found over the years that
super-implementers are rare and precious creatures that it's fun and stimulating to be around. And because what I do can't happen without a product to kibitz on -- I don't implement anymore, but I understand it in principle :-) Internicity (Steve's privately-held company) has some VC funding and unexpectedly granted me some options last year, though I had never thought of asking for 'em. Long (but I hope useful?) answer... TTFN