| Priss, This looks really good. The flowcharts are really helpful for visualizing all the various workflows. A few comments about the overview section. -> Target user + I think it's important to note that all the work detailed in this spec really covers 2 types of users, not just the Casual Collaborator that we describe specifically as the OSAF employee adding PTO to the calendar. Some of these features really fall into the needs of a Chandler desktop checking their personal calendars on the web + The high-level feature list could then map back to each type.... + #1 - Casual Collaborator + Anonymous Access + Navigation + Notification + #2 - Support remote access for Chandler desktop user + Account viewing + Calendar canvas + Managing time-zones + Managing events + Pulling this out into a section that just talks about users would perhaps make this a bit more obvious and address some of Mimi's feedback about the features that don't fall into the target usage scenario. -> Assumptions + I believe what we are trying to convey is that the features for supporting user #1 will be a higher priority for 0.3 than the feature work for supporting user #2. This is kind of spelled out by the fact that we have this very specific usage scenario for a Casual Collaborator. + This does not mean that we do not do any of the work that supports user #2. Depending on how all the work resources out, we could make significant progress on some of these items. + Prioritizing the stuff for our target use case has implications on what gets worked on first, what gets punted to 0.4 and how we triage bugs at the end of the release. + I would suggest perhaps an assumptions section after the target user section that talks about this specifically. + The assumptions would also include listing out stuff like... + The anonymous access issue. As an interim 0.3 solution we are going to not require an account to edit the calendar + Getting this working depends on Chandler desktop publishing a different kind of URL than we do currently. + I know you have some of this in the spec all ready but reiterating it into an assumptions section just re-enforces this stuff better. -> 0.3 Usage Scenario - adding PTO to the office calendar + Think it would be good to detail out the usage scenario separately since it's kind of separate from proposing anonymous access as a solution. + What we do today.... + Send an email to everyone at OSAF and cc Esther and Bianca with PTO dates + Esther adds to the iCal office calendar + What we will have to do in the future... + Get rid of iCal version and use Chandler only + People will have to access or subscribe to read-write version of office calendar + Esther will no longer be responsible for updating the calendar + People will have to add their PTO to the calendar individually as well as notify Bianca. -> Anonymous Access + Like you have currently, I would than talk about why we are proposing anonymous access for 0.3 with a few elaborations... + Giving users an interface via Scooby and not requiring people to run the desktop app. + Making it as simple as possible - few steps. + Small group interaction - assumptions about high level of trust. + We can't force all users to login so if we can't have both in 0.3 and have to choose between that and anonymous access we will go with anonymous access until a tiered solution can be implemented. + I think we can also go ahead and say that this is a 0.3 interim solution and we are working on something better for Beta and 1.0 which should help address many of the concerns. Cheers, Sheila On Jul 17, 2006, at 3:24 PM, Priscilla Chung wrote:
|
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
