[OSDPL] Feedback requested: proposed pattern workflow

Anastasia Cheetham a.cheetham at utoronto.ca
Thu Jan 15 14:29:41 UTC 2009

Jonathan, this looks good!

Specific thoughts in-line:

> - While in "Draft" state, the pattern is visible only to the author.
> The author can save and revise their patterns as they wish.
> - While in "Request for Public Comments" state, all registered users
> on the OSDPL can view and comment on the pattern. The public internet
> will not be able to see the patten (although anyone can register for
> an account). Such patterns are clearly indicated as "Work in Progress"
> as to not confuse it with "Published" patterns.
> - While in "Request for Review", pattern Editors review the pattern
> and collaborate with the pattern author to get it to a polished state.

Who are "Editors" and what does one have to do to become an Editor?

What will the stamp be on patterns at this stage? Same as Comments  
stage ("Work in Progress") or other?

Can the public continue to comment as the pattern is being refined by  
an Editor?

> - To have a pattern stamped as "Reviewed", the author must: request a
> review; and have an Editor review and publish the pattern.
> - For flexibility, the pattern author can publish their pattern at any
> time. But doing so will cause their pattern to be stamped as "Not
> Reviewed".
> -- this allows for immediate visibility to the world and could create
> some interesting interactions.
> -- registered users will be able to comment, rank, and flag patterns.
> -- it is possible to remove a pattern from the public and considered
> on a case-by-case basis.

Can patterns be reviewed by Editors and refined after publish?

> Throughout the workflow notifications are sent to the relevant parties
> alerting them that new content is available for them view, comment, or
> review (in the case of an Editor).

Who counts as a 'relevant party?' Can the general public request to be  

> All patterns that are recently
> published or in a "Request for Public Comments" state will be featured
> clearly and easily accessible on the site (after some improvements to
> the site's look and feel).

Will patterns in the "Request for Review" state be featured?

> What are your thoughts on this? Too complicated? Not open enough?
> Needs more community involvement during the workflow?

Anastasia Cheetham                   a.cheetham at utoronto.ca
Software Designer, Fluid Project    http://fluidproject.org
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre / University of Toronto

More information about the fluid-work mailing list