OHS Project ,
the unfinished revolution
June 8, 2000
previous meeting, next
Announcements and New Business.
Videoconferencing these meetings.
Separate mailing list for development.
Setting a date for license discussion/commitment.
one paragraph project description.
one paragraph "first step" description.
upcoming DARPA whitepaper.
Views for Software Development
Augment Demonstration. 2A
Coppernoll, Mary - Bootstrap Institute
Deneen, John - Astounding
Engelbart, Doug - Bootstrap Institute
Hill, Tom - Education Object Economy Fndtion
Hoffmann, Marcelo - SRI International
Hurd, Jim - Hurd & Associates
Iverson, Lee - SRI International
Kim, Eugene - Freelance Writer/Consultant
Laderoute, Keith - SRI International
Lincoln, Pat - SRI International
Liu, Howard - VerticalNet
Williams, Joe - Williams Publications
Yee, Su-Ling - MilleniumProject/BI Intern. 3A
Drafted by Su-Ling, and once again Eugene makes me
look good with his additions and editing :)
OHS Meeting 6/8/2000, SRI Engineering Bldg, EK255, 4-6 PM. 4A
1) News: 4B
2) Discussion about drafting the proposal for government
We had two new guests this week: Tom Hill, who attended
last week's meeting via teleconference, and Keith Laderaut, who is at SRI's
biology lab, and who'd be interested in using the "10th generation" of
the Open Hyperdocument System. 4B1
Doug relayed that Washington is starting to happen. DARPA
and their information systems people want ideas about how to redo/reuse
the Net. DARPA contracted SPC to run workshops on this topic. Next week,
Doug and Pat will present at this workshop in D.C. (see last week's minutes).
Also, Doug received email from the Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense
who is interested in scaling up the Department of Defense's improvement
Doug contacted Jeff Conklin, an old friend and colleague,
who recently came up with a way to do backlink management. He formed a
startup, but it was not successful. Doug will meet with Conklin while in
Doug and Pat went to Sun today at Andy Poggio's invitation
to discuss how OHS can help solve his division's problem of hardware design
software. One of Andy's biggest short-term needs is better interaction
between his tools. In the long term, Andy could use the OHS. 4B4
Joe has put together an intitial glossary at http://www.hypermultimedia.com/DKR/glossary.htm.
Email him terms, corrections, suggestions, at email@example.com. 4B5
Eugene asked the group about the possibility of video
conferencing or audio broadcasting our meetings so others who cannot attend
can participate. Pat said that the room we use is wired, and so we can
potentially set that up. Eugene suggested tabling the issue until it became
higher priority. 4B6
Eugene suggested starting a separate mailing list focused
solely on the development of OHS. All in agreement. The list will either
be on bootstrap.org (some lists are already there and are not being used)
or on SourceForge. Doug is high on using SourceForge as a development platform.
Eugene will set up a project page there. 4B7
Doug is out of town the next two weeks. On the Thursday
he comes back, he'll be giving his Cadence talk on the OHS. We agreed to
reschedule that week's meeting when the time comes so that Doug can attend.
Eugene proposed we commit to a license by July 6. All
in agreement. Eugene promised to have a summary of the licensing issues
before the next meeting. 4B9
John mentions the VCs he met at a VC conference, particularly
Russell Hall of Legacy. Wants to invite him to one of our meetings. It
is agreed that when we get to the point when we are ready to do a pitch,
this is a good idea. 4B10
3) W3C has talked about getting Doug more involved, possibly
as a fellow. Doug thinks if we move into the right place in W3C, it would
be a terrific community. He knows Tim Berners-Lee well enough that when
we are ready he will approach him. 4D
Pat says pieces from all contributions thus far on the
list can be used to craft this. Eugene especially liked the first few sentences
of Warren's proposal, because it set the context of the project. Pat agreed,
and made the following points:
- Paragraph should set the proper context, as Warren's did.
- It should focus on the U.S.
- It shouldn't mention things like bioweapons or nanoweapons, as DARPA
is currently funding these types of projects.
- The final sentence should suggest what DARPA should do. 4C1
Doug added that we should mention in our pitch that we
are seeking industry funds in parallel. Pat agreed, noting that DARPA expects
technology transition strategies to be mentioned in proposals. 4C2
Pat said that in the "first steps" paragraph, we should
say what we expect to accomplish over the next three years. We need to
include the advantages of solving a serious problem. The OHS and DKR should
be mentioned in this paragraph, along with parallel projects that we see
growing out of these. 4C3
Pat and Lee explain that we are pitching a DARPA program,
not a proposal. Programs provide funding for a multitude of projects. Proposals
are pitched under the auspice of a program. Once a program is created,
DARPA creates a BAA (Broad Agency Announcement) soliciting proposals. In
essence, we are helping DARPA create a BAA with our proposal. 4C4
Marcello noted that the process of creating a program
is a long one, typically around 18 months. Pat added that there are ways
to shortcircuit the process. 4C5
Other notes on the "first steps" paragraph: We should
include the maximum amount of interesting, useful info that will fit in
the paragraph. Referencing standards (eg. XML, etc.) that we can build
on top of is important. Also important to include scheduled breakthroughs.
Pat said that he has enough from the suggested summary
paragraphs to piece together a paragraph of his own, and said that he will
send it out to the mailing list for comments. 4C7
4) Discussion of software development views in OHS.
Storyboard it out. For example, it depends on the
style people do their programming. Doug says it's important to have different
options for views. Brainstorming follows on what would be useful
views to have: 4E1
John proposes building IP protection into the architecture
and discusses 3rd party escrow. Lee says verifiable journaling meets this
Comments-only. Lee asked what this means. Doug noted
that this is useful depending on a programmer's style of commenting. Eugene
agreed, stating that this view might be good for languages that embed documentation
in comments within source code, such as Java. 4E1A
Code-only (no comments). 4E1B
Functions only. 4E1C
Call trees. 4E1D
Object hierarchies. 4E1E
Collapsible blocks. 4E1F
Context highlighting. Eugene noted that while this is
almost a universal feature, there are still some creative things we can
do. For example, he suggested bolding or graying out code based on profiling
information -- the more often code is called, the bolder it looks. Lee
suggested using context highlighting with change log information to do
blame attribution. Pat suggested highlighting code that had been proven
correct. He also suggested combining context highlighting with unit testing
information: highlighting code that had a unit test, code that had been
covered, etc. 4E1G
Change logs. 4E1H
Doug wonders how long it will take us to make a little
prototype. A very important thing to start with is email. Hypermail, adding
linkability and citability. It is agreed that next week we will go through
use cases so we can come up with targets for prototyping. John talks about
WebMinds as a use case. 4E3
5) Demo of Augment. 4F
Doug brought in his personal computer so that he could
demonstrate Augment. He showed its command set, context-completion, help,
linking, multiple views, journal, editing capabilities, extensibility,
etc. It was very cool. 4F1
Above space serves to put hyperlinked
targets at the top of the window
Copyright 2000 Bootstrap Institute.
All rights reserved.