Hi Mark, Thanks for the input. See my answers inline...
When coming to the site, it has to be clear what OSLC is and what it is not. This can be highlighted in the appropriate place, whether that be the home page and/or somewhere in the About pages, e.g. FAQ. [Note to reviewers - Please help add to these lists!] See the attached document, which I used recently to talk about some recent 3.0 changes. It contains info accumulated from Rainer, Jim, Axel and others over a period of time. Up front is some stuff on what is OSLC that may help you. This is very helpful. I’ve seen some of this information before via Rainer’s slides and the current site, but some of it is new. Does this mean you will sponsor the About site section and help me build it out?! We would like the site to enable these types of contributions. They may be translated into user stories , but right now this is just a raw listing of ways to contribute to OSLC. These should help to structure some parts of the site and surface up opportunities. [Note to reviewers - What is missing?] Reference Slide 16 in the attached presentation. The main thing I see missing here, or it is not explicit, is coding contributions. Resources This is the section of the site where visitors will come to learn about OSLC, and related technologies. [Note to reviewers - Apart from the types of resources below, should be consider adding formal documentation to the site? This would require adding a tool like Couscous or the weDocs Wordpress plugin . I would think this is something we might be able to revisit later. I am not sure that we need this at the start. I would be happy to just get some momentum with the examples you are already accounting for (tools, tutorials, white papers, links, etc.) Yes, agreed. From the conversations I’ve had about this, it doesn’t seem to make sense to setup formal documentation. We will port over some content from what we have, and build on that. The wiki can also be utilised for this purpose. Members / Partners ○ Members - A better version of the current Organizations page ○ These are the organisations that have members signed up to the community ○ Note: this might better fit on the ‘Contribute’ page ○ [Note to reviewers - Is this really a good membership model? People come and go all the time meantime organisations might not be active in OSLC. Are there alternative membership models you have seen?] I think this is good information in terms of what organizations we have been able to identify that either support the Member Section, have members participating in workgroups or TCs, who are known to have produced commercially available OSLC solutions, or in the case of system integrators, have expertise in supporting or creating OSLC solutions. So I think the current Organizations page is more or less a loose collection of interested OSLC parties. Not exactly sure where you are headed with the question around the membership model….I’m not sure that is exactly what is being captured here. As for a membership model, does the community need to have some relationship between the OASIS OSLC MS and the community web pages….thinking out loud…..it seems that there is a relationship there somehow. https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/member-sections After discussions last week with Rainer and Andreas, it seems that the Organisations page as-is provides little value and is out-of-date. So that won’t be brought over. We will instead be bringing up affiliated organisations and individuals in different ways throughout the site. If anyone has ideas on good ways to surface that up, let me know. We need to find the balance between acknowledging contributions, while at the same time remaining neutral and welcoming to everyone. For membership, I was thinking originally when I put this comment in about paid models to make the community more self-sustaining. Eclipse has such a model. But perhaps for now the support from OASIS will be enough (they require membership for participation on Specifications). For open-services.net<http://open-services.net>, I don’t think we need a formal membership process for the first iteration. With specification work moved to OASIS, the only possible need for it would be User Groups, but people will now be able to participate in these based on the identities they use in the various channels used for User Group work. Metrics The current site does have analytics, and there are other community metrics being measured. However, it is not being updated and analysed regularly and the process for retrieving the data is highly manual. First, let’s introduce some of the things that we should be tracking. On a high level, they can be split into three categories: site metrics; community metrics; business metrics. [Note to reviewers - What is missing?] We struggled a whole lot with this before in terms of what actually provides useful information to us that exceeds the effort spent to collect it. I think that a) we should look to other community sites to try and see if we can establish a useful small subset of information to start with and understand how other sites use that data, insofar as that is possible. I personally wouldn’t put too much effort into this until everything else is in place and then we can step back, look at the new site from a wider view, and determine what makes sense to track and why. So for the moment, I think your initial set of metrics is fine, but again we shouldn’t spend too much time working on that until everything else is in place unless some of these are low-hanging fruit easy to enable. Ok. Will try to get the basics up for site launch, and then we can build on that. Apart from those specific areas, I am encouraged by the direction outlined here, the initial thoughts for the layout of info, the scope of the technologies invoked (github, wikis, Slack, forums, dashboards), the ideas for designing the site and the external platforms you are referencing for ideas. There are some really helpful ideas in here to get things moving. Thanks. Hopefully, “If we build it, they will come”! Building the site will be one part of the job, in parallel and after that I (we) will focus on making the community more vibrant and grow. Brian
