Do you happen to know ONE example of WebComponent implementation on a active
public site?

And I am glad you said they were useless.

Henry

On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Christian Burne <[email protected]> wrote:

>  A couple things from my perspective.  We (www.oshyn.com) have been
> implementing sites w/ OTWS MS and LiveServer/Delivery Server for about 3-4
> years and have found it to be a decent platform.  It's a java app so it
> requires love and tuning to make it work well, but that's the same with any
> java app.  If you want to do content personalization and/or secuirty of
> content from OT CMS, it works well enough.
>
> What we tell our customers is:  If you need to do custom functionality on
> your external site, you need SOME platform to do it.  If you have existing
> .NET/PHP/Java components or people that you want to use, it's fine to
> publish from OTWS MS into those apps.  If you have nothing and you need
> something, DS will do just fine.  If you have personalization and content
> security requirements on OTWS MS content, that also pushes you back to using
> Delivery Server and taking advantage of pre-existing components using the
> connectors (typically web services work fine).  It typically is more work to
> build content security and content personalization of OTWS MS content in
> PHP/.NET/Java than it is to just use DS.  It's really a question of where
> the balance of your requirements lie in order to determine the right
> decision for you.
>
> I also agree with some other posts that Verity search results can be
> somewhat disappointing and at the very least, tuning serach results are more
> manageable from GSA or google mini and will yeild better site search results
> overall than verity.  However many times, we've implemented BOTH:  used
> GSA for site search, but used Verity for personalization and security.
> There are also some other performance advantages to using this combined type
> of architecture, but it's more stuff to maintain.
>
> Dynamenst aren't really that hard to learn and they are tuned
> specifically for OT content and personalization of that content.  The
> problem is, it IS another language one must learn (and it doesn't really
> help anyone on their resume).   I don't really know why they chose this
> instead of using something standard.  They do have basic programming
> constructs like:  if/else, looping, setting/retrieving variables, calling
> external database or web services.  These are the basics you tend to need
> when building a content driven website.  If you need to do anything that
> can't be done in Dynaments, you can easily drop down to Java and do whatever
> you need to do there.
>
> Web Components is fairly useless as an architecture, however, the
> components that they've created are super basic and can/do work.  I've
> talked about implementing them a number of times w/ clients but never have
> b/c of the feature requirements.  We have them in our lab environment so we
> know they work.  If you need anything sophisticated out of
> Forums/Blogs/Calendars/Comments, etc., then you won't find them in those
> components.  HOWEVER, if you need the content in them personalized or
> secure, it's much easier to do by using the Web Components instead of
> integrating a 3rd party system.  Also, i've got a number of customers who
> don't have immediate needs and are therefore waiting to see what crossover
> will come form the Vignette Social Media tools.  I haven't seen them, but my
> guess is that we'll have to wait to version 1.5 (instead of the initial
> release) before it's worth implementing the "integrated" vignette social
> media tools and we have no idea when they will release them.  That usually
> leaves customers who have an immediate need with trying the current DS Web
> Components or lookign for a 3rd party or hosted solution and integrating it
> (and losing searchability and personalizatoin of that content or doing work
> to integrate)
>
> In terms of cost of DS server, I can't give any type of official response
> (* disclaimer *).  I also don't know if it's changed recently or if
> OT has changed it since the acquisition and of course, it changes depending
> on your size, number you are purchasing and overall negotiating prowess.
> However, a server licenses for DS used to be slightly less than a server
> license for CMS/MS (probably about 80-90%).
>
> I'd be happy to answer any specific questions at my email address:
> [email protected] .    We also have a bunch of blog posts on OTWS DS and
> the different stuff you can do with it on this blog (feel free to scroll
> past the marketing stuff :) ):
> http://www.oshyn.com/_blog/Web_Content_Management/category/OpenText/
>
>  Thanks.
>
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: "Henry Lu a.k.a. Javahand" <[email protected]>
> To: "Christian Burne" <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2010 13:11:39 -0400
> Subject: [reddot] what does liveserver actually do
>
> That's pretty emational stuff Eric. Thanks for the background information.
>
> I agree with the assessment that LiveServer is not for the non-coder to
> use.
>
> Do you have an opinion on the WebComponents stuff? Compared to today's
> commercial grade social media platform (Jive, Lithuam, Onsite, Telligent and
> etc.) what was shipped with LiveServer to handle social media is truly
> "hello world" grade.
>
> I was attacked by certain people within RedDot as "not knowing how to use
> it." But I stuck with my opinion and challenged my criticizers to cite ONE
> example of a RedDot-managed site that uses the WebComponents stuff to
> generate wiki, forum, comments etc.
>
> Just give me one example. At least I have not found one and nobody has
> given me one, albeit many a license have been sold to many clients.
>
> I know the point is kind of moot now as OpenText is swapping the stuff with
> Vignette components, but I am curious if I am really alone in my opinion on
> the WebComponent stuff.
>
> Henry
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Eric Koleda <[email protected] > wrote:
>
>> I worked as a LiveServer specialist for three years at RedDot, so I
>> think I can bring a unique point of view.  The application was
>> originally started as a complete rewrite of CMS in Java, but got
>> scrapped along the way.  In order to save the investment they instead
>> converted it to a "personalization engine".
>>
>> In my opinion LiveServer is kind of like a web application platform.
>> It takes a lot of things that are possible to build on your own and
>> tries to make them easy.  It tries to replace coding with dialogs.  It
>> tries to make it so non-technical people can add dynamic features to
>> their website.
>>
>> In many respects it fails at this.  Learning the custom DynaMent
>> language takes time, and few developers have the skill.  It was never
>> made easy enough that a non-developer could build the functionality,
>> and any good developer would prefer build to build it themselves.  I
>> think that the connectors, when they work, cut out a lot of the nitty
>> gritty of dealing with LDAP, search, etc, but I don't know if they are
>> worth the money and the support contract.
>>
>> If you have talented developers at your organization don't get
>> LiveServer.  If you don't have talented developers, hire them :-)
>>
>> - Eric
>>
>> On Jun 9, 12:10 pm, "Henry Lu a.k.a. Javahand" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > Don't know the circumstances on #1 so cannot really comment.
>> >
>> > On #2, I've come across with at least two client who had LiveServer set
>> up
>> > before I cam eonboard and had their LiveServer http encoding set as
>> "guess"
>> > instead of specific such as utf-8. That config takes care of the
>> character
>> > encoding. It has at least worked for me.
>> >
>> > #3 -- I wonder if yours is a "zone" issue. If a file bearing xml
>> extension
>> > is published into LiveServer, all tags are indexed by Verity as zones
>> and
>> > therefore granularly searchable and can be brought up in search via the
>> > context tag inclusion. With html files, only a few (such as "title")
>> tags
>> > can be indexed as zones. Just a thought.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:47 AM, bobbykjack <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > > I don't know whether it's down to a) how our search was initially set
>> > > up b) my own inability to fix it or c) inherent flaws with the
>> > > LiveServer / verity integration, but we've had the following problems:
>> >
>> > > 1. The search in LiveServer quickly exposes lots of duplicate content
>> > > you'll probably be publishing due to target containers, different
>> > > publishing packages on references/links, etc. And content always seems
>> > > to hang around in LiveServer FAR longer than you'd like.
>> >
>> > > 2. Problems with content-encoding - our search results contain the
>> > > classic 'broken character' glyph all over the place. There seems to be
>> > > no good solution to this.
>> >
>> > > 3. The 'context' presented alongside search results is a complete joke
>> >
>> > > If I had my way, I'd just point our search form to POST to google and
>> > > be done with it ...
>> >
>> > > - Bobby
>> >
>> > > On Jun 9, 3:53 pm, "Henry Lu a.k.a. Javahand" <[email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >  > I'm not pro-LiveServer or anything. So I am not advising anyone to
>> buy
>> > > > LiveServer but for poeple who have bought LiveServer, I see many
>> pluses
>> > > to
>> > > > use it.
>> >
>> > > > LiveServer is mainly designed as an XML based content engine. If you
>> > > happen
>> > > > to have structured an XML project variant in your RedDot CMS, it is
>> > > breeze
>> > > > to let LiveServer digest your CMS-generated content and deliver them
>> > > > personalized.
>> >
>> > > > The other benefit of LiveServer is the embedded Verity search
>> engine. It
>> > > is
>> > > > an OEM version but nonetheless commercial grade. It completes the
>> neat
>> > > > coupling of CMS and personalized content delivery as all XML tags
>> can be
>> > > > interpreted as database field and explicit or implicit search can be
>> > > > conducted using SQL syntax.
>> >
>> > > > And the LDAP connector allows you to use your AD or other LDAP to
>> manage
>> > > > site user base and implement SSO fairly reliably and easily.
>> >
>> > > > I am well aware of the hostility toward LiveServer in the RedDot
>> > > community.
>> > > > But I have done projects whereby LiveServer was designed to deliver
>> > > targeted
>> > > > content to a .NET application, and LiveServer was designed to ingest
>> > > content
>> > > > generated from Drupal; I've also done projects whereby LiveServer
>> has to
>> > > > intereact with ConstantContact API and one whereby LiveServer has to
>> > > deliver
>> > > > product search result en masse (and the caching mechanism of
>> LiveServer
>> > > > proved to be robust enough).
>> >
>> > > > The biggest, yet a bit intagible benefit of LiveServer is that the
>> task
>> > > of
>> > > > content "organization" can be delegated to LiveServer instead of
>> fighting
>> > > > the uphill battle inside RedDot CMS. Many hot topics on this board,
>> such
>> > > as
>> > > > pagination, show and hide ans etc can be implemented in LiveServer
>> with a
>> > > > fraction of the effort you'd put when doing it inside CMS. I always
>> tell
>> > > my
>> > > > client, "CMS is a workshop, treat it as a laundry chute and let
>> > > LiveServer
>> > > > handle the presentation logic on the live site."
>> >
>> > > > So I really have nothing to hate about LiveServer except when a
>> customer
>> > > > wants to build a social community out of LiveServer. That is the
>> moment I
>> > > > absolutely jump out of LiveServer. The so-called LiveServer
>> WebComponents
>> > > > cutely named as Wiki, Forum and etc are just no more than a joke.
>> >
>> > > > And I think OpenText is admitting it now bacuase it is shipping
>> Vignette
>> > > > components to customers who have bought those WebComponents now.
>> >
>> > > > So my conclusion? YMMV. If you are humble enough to go through the
>> > > > documentation, you will learn to set up a LiveServer installation
>> and
>> > > find
>> > > > most built-in features handy and easy. If you expect to use
>> LiveServer's
>> > > > proprietary Dynament API in the same fashion you have learnt and are
>> > > using
>> > > > as .NET, PHP or Java, you will hate LiveServer immediately.
>> >
>> > > > Henry Lu, a.k.a., Javahand
>> > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 6:09 AM, TonyGayter <
>> [email protected]
>> > > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > My advise is to not use it. We have used it once and regret it.
>> Its a
>> > > > > pain to learn and use. As far as I remember its around 25k which
>> is
>> > > > > far to much. My advise would be to  just integrate .net into the
>> site
>> > > > > and use a google box for the search, only a couple of grand then.
>> Far
>> > > > > cheaper and a better alternative. (.Net also works wihtin
>> smartedit if
>> > > > > done properly which live server doesnt.)
>> >
>> > > > > On Jun 9, 10:56 am, bobbykjack <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > > > LiveServer is a content delivery application, which offers some
>> of
>> > > the
>> > > > > > scripting capabilities of a language such as PHP. It also
>> provides
>> > > > > > some of the features that a web server offers.
>> >
>> > > > > > Our use of it is very minimal (and I've always been tempted to
>> remove
>> > > > > > it from our 'stack') - almost entirely restricted to internal
>> search.
>> > > > > > However, the results we've seen from that search function are
>> less
>> > > > > > than perfect, to say the least. It's also difficult (if not
>> > > > > > impossible) to combine LiveServer and PHP, so if you have a page
>> that
>> > > > > > needs to contain PHP script, it has to bypass LiveServer.
>> >
>> > > > > > My big beef with LiveServer is that it's yet another language to
>> > > learn
>> > > > > > (one which only a tiny number of people will ever know, compared
>> to
>> > > > > > something like PHP) and it's nowhere near as flexible as a
>> 'normal'
>> > > > > > scripting language.
>> >
>> > > > > > Having said that, I've recently identified another potential use
>> > > which
>> > > > > > I'm just about to post about ...
>> >
>> > > > > > - Bobby
>> >
>> > > > > > On Jun 9, 1:16 am, gk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > > > > > > We've been using the RedDot CMS V9 for 12 months now but we
>> had a
>> > > > > > > limited budget at the time we bought it and so we don't have
>> > > > > > > Liveserver - in fact Liveserver was never even mentioned by
>> our
>> > > > > > > supplier. I'm just wondering if someone can tell me what
>> Liveserver
>> > > > > > > actually does and whether it's worth thinking about adding it
>> to
>> > > our
>> > > > > > > setup?
>> >
>> > > > > > > Also, a very rough idea of the cost would be appreciated as I
>> don't
>> > > > > > > want to initiate any sales discussions until I know whether it
>> > > might
>> > > > > > > be totally out of our price range.- Hide quoted text -
>> >
>> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>> >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > > Groups
>> > > > > "RedDot CMS Users" group.
>> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
>> [email protected]
>> > > .
>> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>
>> > > > > [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]><reddot-cms-users%2Bunsubscrib
>> [email protected]>
>> > > < 
>> > > reddot-cms-users%[email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]><reddot-cms-users%252Bunsub
>> [email protected]>
>> >
>> > > > > .
>> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
>> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.
>> >
>> > > > --
>> > > >646-807-8683
>> >
>> > > --
>> > >  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups
>> > > "RedDot CMS Users" group.
>> > > To post to this group, send email to
>> [email protected].
>> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>
>> > > [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]><reddot-cms-users%2Bunsubscrib
>> [email protected]>
>>
>> > > .
>> > > For more options, visit this group at
>> > > http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.
>> >
>> > --
>> > 646-807-8683
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "RedDot CMS Users" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]>
>> .
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 646-807-8683
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RedDot CMS Users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.
>
>   --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RedDot CMS Users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.
>



-- 
646-807-8683

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"RedDot CMS Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to