[Vif-devel] List of future tasks

[Luthiger S. B. <ben...@id...>]

Hello

I send you a list of features the application misses in the actual =
state:

---

1.) Subject: Display of information about the responsible member.
Rationale: In the view to process workflow tasks, there should be some =
information displayed who is reviewing (in the author's view, i.e. =
'Pending contributions') and who has authored (in the reviewer's view, =
i.e. 'Process requests') respectively. (minor challenge)

2.) Subject: Display of completions for reviewers.
Rationale: Reviewers should have the possibility to view completions =
while processing workflow tasks (e.g. accepting review task or =
publishing contributions). This is already implemented for new =
questions, but has to be done for completions too.
Note: The task should have the id 'showCompletion' because =
/vifapp/forum/shared/groups/bodyReview.xsl calls the servlet with this =
requestType. (minor challenge)

3.) Subject: Improving the UI by adding access keys to the forms.
Rational: Adding access keys to the forms displayed by the application =
makes it easier to navigate throw a form using the keyboard only. (minor =
challenge)

4.) Subject: Webmail integrated in the administration part.
Rationale: Administrators should have the possibility to send a mail to =
all members or to all participants of selected groups. Also the group =
administrators should this mail feature to send mails to the =
participants of the discussion group they're administering. (minor =
challenge)

5.) Subject: A non responding participant has to be excluded from the =
set of persons the random selection for reviewers is processing.
Rationale: If a designated reviewer doesn't respond or gives back his =
review task, he has to be excluded from the set of participants the =
random selections draws its choice. This is necessary for that this =
participant doesn't gets selected again. (minor challenge)

6.) Subject: Participants should have the possibility to suspend =
participation.
Rationale: The review system of the discussion forum designates randomly =
participants in the discussion group to review a contribution. A mail is =
sent to the designated reviewer to invite him or her to review the =
specified contribution. This works fine if all participants are =
accessible. However the workflow is blocked if a designated reviewer is =
e.g. in holidays and, therefore, not addressable for some days (or =
weeks). In this case, participants should have the possibility to =
suspend participation, i.e. to tell the system that they're not =
available as reviewer. (medium challenge) -> assigned to Jacek.

7.) Subject: Integration of existing person database.
Rationale: The discussion forum could be used within an organisation. =
Existing organisation usually have their member data already stored, =
e.g. in a database. In such cases, the reuse of existing member data is =
essential. Therefore, there need's to be a way to integrated the =
existing member data instead of the project's tblMember. (medium =
challenge)

8.) Subject: Improved view of discussion group (the questions of a =
discussion group).
Rationale: The actual implementation of the discussion group's view is a =
simple list of all questions in the group, sorted by the decimal number =
of the question. This actual view is scanty and should be improved. An =
improved view could e.g. implement a tree like structure where single =
discussion threads can be expanded or reduced. (medium challenge)

9.) Subject: Create and integrate new types of entities: Persons, Texts =
and URLs.
Rationale: The discussion in a discussion group creates contributions in =
form of questions and completions. A factual discussion, however, might =
also include additional entities to support the argumentation, e.g. =
bibliographical information to reference quotations in a text (or URLs =
to reference quotations on a web resource) as well as biographical =
information to reference persons who created a quotation. These =
additional three entities (together with additional helper tables e.g. =
for historisation) have been sketched already (see VIF Datamodel, =
Version 1.5.5) but they have to be integrated into the application yet. =
Besides of persistence layer issues the application's UI has to be =
adjusted to allow participants to create such entities, to modify and to =
reference them. (major challenge)

10.) Subject: Unlock mechanism in case of no response to requests for a =
review.
Rationale: If a discussion group has activated reviewing (by setting the =
number of reviewers > 0) the problem arises that the publication of a =
contribution can be blocked if a request for a review is not responded =
by the randomly designated reviewer (e.g. because the designated =
reviewer is absent at the time). To unlock such situations, the =
application has to select an alternative reviewer if the contributor =
doesn't get any response in a configurable time span. To implement such =
an unlocking mechanism, the application has to create a special thread =
that checks in regular intervals the response state of all requests for =
a review. (major challenge)=20

11.) Subject: Rating system to assess the author's/reviewer's behaviour.
Rationale: After the publication of a contribution, the interaction =
partners should have the possibility to rate the partner's behaviour =
concerning speed and correctness of the response. The rating system =
should be basic (like ebay), consisting only of three measures 'good', =
'no answer' and 'dissatisfied'. The goal of the rating system is to =
build up the contributors' reputation. (major challenge)

12.) Subject: LDAP integration (or different directory systems).
Rationale: The discussion forum could be used within an organisation. =
Existing organisation may have set up their directory system for user =
authentication already. Is such cases, it would be nice if the =
application could use existing directory systems. (major challenge)

13.) Subject: Plugable skins for the application.
Rationale: The discussion forum could be used within an organisation. =
Existing organisation might have their corporate design to display =
content produced within the organisation. It would be nice if there's a =
way such organisations could display the content produced with the =
discussion forum in the corporate's design. (major challenge)

---

I'll publish this feature list on the project's 'Feature Requests' too =
(see https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=3D29728&atid=3D397061).

Regards,
Benno