Hippo CMS

[Adrian Crum]

On 6/21/2010 10:30 AM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>> enough time and commitment...
>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
> (the latter being the most error prone).

What? No Magic 8 Ball?

[Ean Schuessler]

Adrian Crum wrote:
> What? No Magic 8 Ball?
You can't use those for Open Source projects. They're patented.

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO
[hidden email]
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com

[Jacques Le Roux]

From: "Ean Schuessler" <[hidden email]>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>> enough time and commitment...
>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
> (the latter being the most error prone).

I tend to favor Book of Changes (this for almost 30 years now, and quite happy with it :o)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Changes
But as I'm alone I have no merits

I don't know anything about futures markets :/

Jacques
 
> --
> Ean Schuessler, CTO
> [hidden email]
> 214-720-0700 x 315
> Brainfood, Inc.
> http://www.brainfood.com
>
>

[Adam Heath-2]

Ean Schuessler wrote:

> Scott Gray wrote:
>> Well it all really comes down to the question of who gets to define the structure of the content, is it OFBiz or is it the CMS?
>>
>> If it is OFBiz, then will other CMS' be able to consume that structure or will we be left trying to write our own?
>>
>> If it is the CMS, then in order to support more than one CMS, OFBiz would need some sort of mapping mechanism to provide OFBiz developers with a consistent structure to work with.
>>
>> But as I said earlier, I really don't have enough knowledge at the moment about any of this and will need to do more research before I can say anything that isn't based on guesses and hunches.  It would be nice if others interested in this did some as well.
>>  
> Any CMS integrated with OFBiz will need to link content items to
> products, parties, workflows and so on that exist outside of the CMS
> model. In that sense, OFBiz must define the content model because the
> root of the content is the OFBiz datamodel and not the other way around.
>
> The question is whether the CMS model that is used to control content
> related to the OFBiz data model should be the same CMS that is used to
> manage blogs, forums, wikis and other useful goodies. To me, the prime
> mover in these categories quickly becomes the code controlling the
> content rather than the data structures because the data structures are
> fairly simple. Looking at JSR-283 based solutions, one does not see
> anything even close in terms of popularity to systems such as Wordpress,
> Drupal or even Roller.
>
> With regard to the JSR-286, I think its a maze of confusion and a dead
> technology. This article sort of sums it up
> http://today.java.net/article/2009/01/16/jsr-286-edge-irrelevance.
> Google Gadgets has as much or more these days and yet its adoption is by
> no means assured.
>
> If we really want to switch to JSR-283 as our content interface then I
> guess the first sensible step would be a JSR-283 adapter on top of the
> current CMS so that new and old content apps can exist side by side.
> Once all the existing code is migrated to use the JSR-283 interfaces we
> could switch out the underlying provider. This would have the added
> advantage of being able to publish OFBiz legacy content into a JSR-283
> environment. Of course, we would still have to work out how to provide
> ECAs on this new technology and take care of all the other details that
> the current framework gives us.

Something not mentioned above, is that I should not be forced to
abandon my favorite editor.  This includes using vim, emacs,
dreamweaver, and grep+perl+cat+sed.


>

[Shi Yusen]

在 2010-06-21一的 11:45 -0500，Ean Schuessler写道：

> With regard to the JSR-286, I think its a maze of confusion and a dead
> technology. This article sort of sums it up
> http://today.java.net/article/2009/01/16/jsr-286-edge-irrelevance.
> Google Gadgets has as much or more these days and yet its adoption is by
> no means assured.
A nonsense article. A few months is not long enough to understand portal
for the author.

[BJ Freeman]

to through another twigg on the pile
how about a WebDav that interfaces with the current content manager.

=========================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation  <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52>
Specialtymarket.com  <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


Adam Heath sent the following on 6/21/2010 10:44 AM:

> Ean Schuessler wrote:
>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>> Well it all really comes down to the question of who gets to define the structure of the content, is it OFBiz or is it the CMS?
>>>
>>> If it is OFBiz, then will other CMS' be able to consume that structure or will we be left trying to write our own?
>>>
>>> If it is the CMS, then in order to support more than one CMS, OFBiz would need some sort of mapping mechanism to provide OFBiz developers with a consistent structure to work with.
>>>
>>> But as I said earlier, I really don't have enough knowledge at the moment about any of this and will need to do more research before I can say anything that isn't based on guesses and hunches.  It would be nice if others interested in this did some as well.
>>>
>> Any CMS integrated with OFBiz will need to link content items to
>> products, parties, workflows and so on that exist outside of the CMS
>> model. In that sense, OFBiz must define the content model because the
>> root of the content is the OFBiz datamodel and not the other way around.
>>
>> The question is whether the CMS model that is used to control content
>> related to the OFBiz data model should be the same CMS that is used to
>> manage blogs, forums, wikis and other useful goodies. To me, the prime
>> mover in these categories quickly becomes the code controlling the
>> content rather than the data structures because the data structures are
>> fairly simple. Looking at JSR-283 based solutions, one does not see
>> anything even close in terms of popularity to systems such as Wordpress,
>> Drupal or even Roller.
>>
>> With regard to the JSR-286, I think its a maze of confusion and a dead
>> technology. This article sort of sums it up
>> http://today.java.net/article/2009/01/16/jsr-286-edge-irrelevance.
>> Google Gadgets has as much or more these days and yet its adoption is by
>> no means assured.
>>
>> If we really want to switch to JSR-283 as our content interface then I
>> guess the first sensible step would be a JSR-283 adapter on top of the
>> current CMS so that new and old content apps can exist side by side.
>> Once all the existing code is migrated to use the JSR-283 interfaces we
>> could switch out the underlying provider. This would have the added
>> advantage of being able to publish OFBiz legacy content into a JSR-283
>> environment. Of course, we would still have to work out how to provide
>> ECAs on this new technology and take care of all the other details that
>> the current framework gives us.
>
> Something not mentioned above, is that I should not be forced to
> abandon my favorite editor.  This includes using vim, emacs,
> dreamweaver, and grep+perl+cat+sed.
>
>
>>
>
>

[Adrian Crum]

I've offered to develop that in the past. We have some basic WebDAV code
in the framework.

-Adrian

On 6/21/2010 1:18 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:

>
> to through another twigg on the pile
> how about a WebDav that interfaces with the current content manager.
>
> =========================
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
>
> Adam Heath sent the following on 6/21/2010 10:44 AM:
>> Ean Schuessler wrote:
>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>> Well it all really comes down to the question of who gets to define
>>>> the structure of the content, is it OFBiz or is it the CMS?
>>>>
>>>> If it is OFBiz, then will other CMS' be able to consume that
>>>> structure or will we be left trying to write our own?
>>>>
>>>> If it is the CMS, then in order to support more than one CMS, OFBiz
>>>> would need some sort of mapping mechanism to provide OFBiz
>>>> developers with a consistent structure to work with.
>>>>
>>>> But as I said earlier, I really don't have enough knowledge at the
>>>> moment about any of this and will need to do more research before I
>>>> can say anything that isn't based on guesses and hunches. It would
>>>> be nice if others interested in this did some as well.
>>>>
>>> Any CMS integrated with OFBiz will need to link content items to
>>> products, parties, workflows and so on that exist outside of the CMS
>>> model. In that sense, OFBiz must define the content model because the
>>> root of the content is the OFBiz datamodel and not the other way around.
>>>
>>> The question is whether the CMS model that is used to control content
>>> related to the OFBiz data model should be the same CMS that is used to
>>> manage blogs, forums, wikis and other useful goodies. To me, the prime
>>> mover in these categories quickly becomes the code controlling the
>>> content rather than the data structures because the data structures are
>>> fairly simple. Looking at JSR-283 based solutions, one does not see
>>> anything even close in terms of popularity to systems such as Wordpress,
>>> Drupal or even Roller.
>>>
>>> With regard to the JSR-286, I think its a maze of confusion and a dead
>>> technology. This article sort of sums it up
>>> http://today.java.net/article/2009/01/16/jsr-286-edge-irrelevance.
>>> Google Gadgets has as much or more these days and yet its adoption is by
>>> no means assured.
>>>
>>> If we really want to switch to JSR-283 as our content interface then I
>>> guess the first sensible step would be a JSR-283 adapter on top of the
>>> current CMS so that new and old content apps can exist side by side.
>>> Once all the existing code is migrated to use the JSR-283 interfaces we
>>> could switch out the underlying provider. This would have the added
>>> advantage of being able to publish OFBiz legacy content into a JSR-283
>>> environment. Of course, we would still have to work out how to provide
>>> ECAs on this new technology and take care of all the other details that
>>> the current framework gives us.
>>
>> Something not mentioned above, is that I should not be forced to
>> abandon my favorite editor. This includes using vim, emacs,
>> dreamweaver, and grep+perl+cat+sed.
>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Adam Heath-2]

BJ Freeman wrote:
>
> to through another twigg on the pile
> how about a WebDav that interfaces with the current content manager.

Not all that great.

Layers upon layers upon layers makes things slow an non-performant.
userfs to access webdav, talking to a backend java webdav server(good
like finding one of those that is easy to extend), that then talks
thru a database access layer, to finally get the raw file bytes, would
suck.

Just use the raw filesystem that all operating systems already
support, using whatever fileserver technology you want.  Why
reimplement nfs/smb in java, why reimplement git/svn/hg/cvs in java?

[Scott Gray-2]

On 22/06/2010, at 4:45 AM, Ean Schuessler wrote:

> Scott Gray wrote:
>> Well it all really comes down to the question of who gets to define the structure of the content, is it OFBiz or is it the CMS?
>>
>> If it is OFBiz, then will other CMS' be able to consume that structure or will we be left trying to write our own?
>>
>> If it is the CMS, then in order to support more than one CMS, OFBiz would need some sort of mapping mechanism to provide OFBiz developers with a consistent structure to work with.
>>
>> But as I said earlier, I really don't have enough knowledge at the moment about any of this and will need to do more research before I can say anything that isn't based on guesses and hunches.  It would be nice if others interested in this did some as well.
>>
> Any CMS integrated with OFBiz will need to link content items to
> products, parties, workflows and so on that exist outside of the CMS
> model. In that sense, OFBiz must define the content model because the
> root of the content is the OFBiz datamodel and not the other way around.

Not necessarily, OFBiz need only know the location of a given piece of content and how to interact with it.  So instead of entities being related to Content records, they would instead have pointers to locations in the content repository.

> The question is whether the CMS model that is used to control content
> related to the OFBiz data model should be the same CMS that is used to
> manage blogs, forums, wikis and other useful goodies. To me, the prime
> mover in these categories quickly becomes the code controlling the
> content rather than the data structures because the data structures are
> fairly simple. Looking at JSR-283 based solutions, one does not see
> anything even close in terms of popularity to systems such as Wordpress,
> Drupal or even Roller.

The answer to that question is up to the individual, if OFBiz offers a blog, wiki, forum or whatever it doesn't mean that anyone is going to be forced to use it.  If any of those things were to be developed it would only be because someone needed it, same as anything in else OFBiz.  OFBiz has accounting functionality, but that doesn't prevent anyone from using alternative accounting systems.

> With regard to the JSR-286, I think its a maze of confusion and a dead
> technology. This article sort of sums it up
> http://today.java.net/article/2009/01/16/jsr-286-edge-irrelevance.
> Google Gadgets has as much or more these days and yet its adoption is by
> no means assured.

How did you just segue into JSR-286?

> If we really want to switch to JSR-283 as our content interface then I
> guess the first sensible step would be a JSR-283 adapter on top of the
> current CMS so that new and old content apps can exist side by side.

You're welcome to work on that but it certainly won't be anything I'm going to touch.  To borrow from you a bit, our content application is a maze of confusion and dead code.
The best I would be willing to offer is migration services for importing data from the Content model into the new repository.

> Once all the existing code is migrated to use the JSR-283 interfaces we
> could switch out the underlying provider. This would have the added
> advantage of being able to publish OFBiz legacy content into a JSR-283
> environment. Of course, we would still have to work out how to provide
> ECAs on this new technology and take care of all the other details that
> the current framework gives us.

Shouldn't be too difficult I imagine, some sort of listener keeping an eye on node changes in the repo and sending a notification to OFBiz via (I guess) a Node ECA mechanism.

Regards
Scott

[Scott Gray-2]

On 22/06/2010, at 5:44 AM, Adam Heath wrote:

> Ean Schuessler wrote:
>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>> Well it all really comes down to the question of who gets to define the structure of the content, is it OFBiz or is it the CMS?
>>>
>>> If it is OFBiz, then will other CMS' be able to consume that structure or will we be left trying to write our own?
>>>
>>> If it is the CMS, then in order to support more than one CMS, OFBiz would need some sort of mapping mechanism to provide OFBiz developers with a consistent structure to work with.
>>>
>>> But as I said earlier, I really don't have enough knowledge at the moment about any of this and will need to do more research before I can say anything that isn't based on guesses and hunches.  It would be nice if others interested in this did some as well.
>>>
>> Any CMS integrated with OFBiz will need to link content items to
>> products, parties, workflows and so on that exist outside of the CMS
>> model. In that sense, OFBiz must define the content model because the
>> root of the content is the OFBiz datamodel and not the other way around.
>>
>> The question is whether the CMS model that is used to control content
>> related to the OFBiz data model should be the same CMS that is used to
>> manage blogs, forums, wikis and other useful goodies. To me, the prime
>> mover in these categories quickly becomes the code controlling the
>> content rather than the data structures because the data structures are
>> fairly simple. Looking at JSR-283 based solutions, one does not see
>> anything even close in terms of popularity to systems such as Wordpress,
>> Drupal or even Roller.
>>
>> With regard to the JSR-286, I think its a maze of confusion and a dead
>> technology. This article sort of sums it up
>> http://today.java.net/article/2009/01/16/jsr-286-edge-irrelevance.
>> Google Gadgets has as much or more these days and yet its adoption is by
>> no means assured.
>>
>> If we really want to switch to JSR-283 as our content interface then I
>> guess the first sensible step would be a JSR-283 adapter on top of the
>> current CMS so that new and old content apps can exist side by side.
>> Once all the existing code is migrated to use the JSR-283 interfaces we
>> could switch out the underlying provider. This would have the added
>> advantage of being able to publish OFBiz legacy content into a JSR-283
>> environment. Of course, we would still have to work out how to provide
>> ECAs on this new technology and take care of all the other details that
>> the current framework gives us.
>
> Something not mentioned above, is that I should not be forced to
> abandon my favorite editor.  This includes using vim, emacs,
> dreamweaver, and grep+perl+cat+sed.

Jackrabbit has WebDAV support, as does dreamweaver, vim and emacs.

[David E. Jones-2]

On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> From: "Ean Schuessler" <[hidden email]>
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>>> enough time and commitment...
>>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
>> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
>> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
>> (the latter being the most error prone).
>
> I tend to favor Book of Changes (this for almost 30 years now, and quite happy with it :o)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Changes
> But as I'm alone I have no merits
>
> I don't know anything about futures markets :/

Futures markets... aka "gambling". ;)

Actually, it's a really interesting idea in the "Wisdom of Crowds" context:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds

-David

[Adam Heath-2]

Scott Gray wrote:
> On 22/06/2010, at 5:44 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
>> Something not mentioned above, is that I should not be forced to
>> abandon my favorite editor.  This includes using vim, emacs,
>> dreamweaver, and grep+perl+cat+sed.
>
> Jackrabbit has WebDAV support, as does dreamweaver, vim and emacs.

find/ls/cat/grep/sed/perl don't.

git doesn't.  svn doesn't.

The latter means that they store the local files in webdav, or
something.  Not that they talk to a remote server for pulling in fresh
updates.

[Scott Gray-2]

On 22/06/2010, at 12:35 PM, Adam Heath wrote:

> Scott Gray wrote:
>> On 22/06/2010, at 5:44 AM, Adam Heath wrote:
>>> Something not mentioned above, is that I should not be forced to
>>> abandon my favorite editor.  This includes using vim, emacs,
>>> dreamweaver, and grep+perl+cat+sed.
>>
>> Jackrabbit has WebDAV support, as does dreamweaver, vim and emacs.
>
> find/ls/cat/grep/sed/perl don't.

I'm so sad that our business users won't be able to make use of these tools in their ERP systems.

> git doesn't.  svn doesn't.
>
> The latter means that they store the local files in webdav, or
> something.  Not that they talk to a remote server for pulling in fresh
> updates.

Bait and switch on the conversation topic.  Right now I care little about SCM tools in relation to content management, there are really much bigger fish to fry.

What I'm looking to solve is the common business uses of content management in support of an ERP system, something in which OFBiz lacks at the moment.  I don't want to get bogged down by edge cases and advanced requirements when there is already so much to think about.

Regards
Scott

[Sascha Rodekamp-3]

+1

i like the idea integrating a full featured CMS in ofbiz, a few weeks ago we
started working with JCR but i think the Hippo way is a good one too :-)
So Scott i would volunteer to help you :-) ...

Have a good day
Sascha

2010/6/19 Scott Gray <[hidden email]>

> Anybody using or considered using Hippo CMS (onehippo.org) in conjunction
> with OFBiz?
> - Apache Licensed
> - Uses Jackrabbit as its repository
> - Supports Versioning, Internationalization, Publishing Workflows and more
>
> We could start out by using Hippo's UI to manage content and retrieve it
> for display within OFBiz using the JCR API.  As the various document types
> needed by the OFBiz base applications begin to take shape we could look at
> ways to allow the content to be modified directly from within OFBiz (once
> again using the JCR API).
>
> Any thoughts, alternatives, ideas or whatever would be appreciated.  I'm
> considering working on a POC in my spare time, not sure how long that might
> take at this stage.  I already have a copy of Hippo running inside OFBiz but
> that was just a matter of expanding their WAR distribution and wrapping it
> in a component, next step would be gaining access to the repo from OFBiz
> code.
>
> Thanks
> Scott
>
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

--
Sascha Rodekamp
   Lynx-Consulting GmbH
   Johanniskirchplatz 6
   D-33615 Bielefeld
   http://www.lynx.de

[Jacques Le Roux]

Interesting, thanks David!

Jacques

From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>

> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> From: "Ean Schuessler" <[hidden email]>
>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>>>> enough time and commitment...
>>>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
>>> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
>>> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
>>> (the latter being the most error prone).
>>
>> I tend to favor Book of Changes (this for almost 30 years now, and quite happy with it :o)
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Changes
>> But as I'm alone I have no merits
>>
>> I don't know anything about futures markets :/
>
> Futures markets... aka "gambling". ;)
>
> Actually, it's a really interesting idea in the "Wisdom of Crowds" context:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
>
> -David
>

[Pierre Smits]

Deyan Tsvetano (see message on the user ML) has integrated OFBiz with
Alfresco. Maybe he is willing to share some insights.



2010/6/22 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>

> Interesting, thanks David!
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>
>  On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>  From: "Ean Schuessler" <[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>>>>> enough time and commitment...
>>>>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
>>>>>
>>>> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
>>>> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
>>>> (the latter being the most error prone).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I tend to favor Book of Changes (this for almost 30 years now, and quite
>>> happy with it :o)
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Changes
>>> But as I'm alone I have no merits
>>>
>>> I don't know anything about futures markets :/
>>>
>>
>> Futures markets... aka "gambling". ;)
>>
>> Actually, it's a really interesting idea in the "Wisdom of Crowds"
>> context:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
> Interesting, thanks David!

I especially like the last lines of the Criticism :D

Jacques
 

> Jacques
>
> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>> From: "Ean Schuessler" <[hidden email]>
>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>>>>> enough time and commitment...
>>>>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
>>>> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
>>>> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
>>>> (the latter being the most error prone).
>>>
>>> I tend to favor Book of Changes (this for almost 30 years now, and quite happy with it :o)
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Changes
>>> But as I'm alone I have no merits
>>>
>>> I don't know anything about futures markets :/
>>
>> Futures markets... aka "gambling". ;)
>>
>> Actually, it's a really interesting idea in the "Wisdom of Crowds" context:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
>>
>> -David
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Alfresco is GPL and AFAIK not based on JackRabbit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfresco_%28software%29

Jacques

From: "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]>

> Deyan Tsvetano (see message on the user ML) has integrated OFBiz with
> Alfresco. Maybe he is willing to share some insights.
>
>
>
> 2010/6/22 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>
>
>> Interesting, thanks David!
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>>
>>  On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>
>>>  From: "Ean Schuessler" <[hidden email]>
>>>>
>>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have not much time to comment, but +1 for me, now we need to have
>>>>>> enough time and commitment...
>>>>>> BTW, who is the CEO at Brainfood? :o)
>>>>>>
>>>>> We use a roulette table to make any important decisions though
>>>>> occasionally we dabble in coin flips, the i-Ching and futures markets
>>>>> (the latter being the most error prone).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I tend to favor Book of Changes (this for almost 30 years now, and quite
>>>> happy with it :o)
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Changes
>>>> But as I'm alone I have no merits
>>>>
>>>> I don't know anything about futures markets :/
>>>>
>>>
>>> Futures markets... aka "gambling". ;)
>>>
>>> Actually, it's a really interesting idea in the "Wisdom of Crowds"
>>> context:
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[BJ Freeman]

[What I'm looking to solve is the common business uses of content
management in support of an ERP system, something in which OFBiz lacks
at the moment. ]
OK reset. for a hard headed person that has to be hit over the head with
a sludge hammer.
Are we talking about storing documents that a business must keep, like
faxes, word docs, images different scanned documents, type of content?
so a user can go to a page scan a document and attach it to say an
agreement or a shipping segment or shipper for that matter.

Being able to hook a engineering document system into the manufacturing?
later can pull up the document that may not be stored in ofbiz but is
referenced on a remote system,but associated with some process that is
in ofbiz.

I may be too simple but it seems  to me our datasource would be a way to
do this. by expanding how a datasource references material.then have
plugins effectively that allow view of different content.
I was leaning to using openoffice.

Scott Gray sent the following on 6/21/2010 6:10 PM:


=========================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation  <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52>
Specialtymarket.com  <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>

> What I'm looking to solve is the common business uses of content management in support of an ERP system, something in which OFBiz lacks at the moment.

[BJ Freeman]

I wrote an application for corporation some years ago.
you could parse and store a document that reference many external links
The App would then section the document and as sections were changed
keep a history similar to svn so you could compare past sections roughly
like the wiki but in the documents native type.
if an external link changed it was also noted in the document and
notices sent to the responsible parties.

In the lower layers, parsers were written to handle different content.


=========================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation  <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52>
Specialtymarket.com  <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


BJ Freeman sent the following on 6/22/2010 12:42 AM:

> [What I'm looking to solve is the common business uses of content
> management in support of an ERP system, something in which OFBiz lacks
> at the moment. ]
> OK reset. for a hard headed person that has to be hit over the head with
> a sludge hammer.
> Are we talking about storing documents that a business must keep, like
> faxes, word docs, images different scanned documents, type of content?
> so a user can go to a page scan a document and attach it to say an
> agreement or a shipping segment or shipper for that matter.
>
> Being able to hook a engineering document system into the manufacturing?
> later can pull up the document that may not be stored in ofbiz but is
> referenced on a remote system,but associated with some process that is
> in ofbiz.
>
> I may be too simple but it seems to me our datasource would be a way to
> do this. by expanding how a datasource references material.then have
> plugins effectively that allow view of different content.
> I was leaning to using openoffice.
>
> Scott Gray sent the following on 6/21/2010 6:10 PM:
>
>
> =========================
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
>> What I'm looking to solve is the common business uses of content
>> management in support of an ERP system, something in which OFBiz lacks
>> at the moment.
>