[OSDPL] Feedback requested: proposed pattern workflow

Allison Bloodworth abloodworth at berkeley.edu
Tue Jan 20 23:19:53 UTC 2009

Thanks Jonathan for your great work on this! I agree that this is a  
very balanced structure to start with, which can be refined as needed  
we start to work with authors in the library.

My only big question is whether it would be strange for patterns to  
disappear from the library while they are in review. Folks may have  
seen them before and want to reference them again. In an ideal world  
it would be nice if we could let the public see a different version of  
the pattern from the one the reviewer and editor are working on, but  
I'm not sure we can easily accomplish that. We may want to consider  
making a copy of the pattern when it goes into review so folks can  
still see it. I actually think it would be OK in this step to let  
people continue to make comments--but I'm assuming that there probably  
wouldn't be *that* many comments and the authors and editors wouldn't  
be bombarded. However, if the comments would be on a copy, that may  
not be idea as I envision that when the pattern is published this copy  
would be deleted. Then the comments would have to either be copied  
over to the 'final' pattern or be lost (which wouldn't be good).

I also think it's going to be important to have good filtering  
mechanisms for pattern library users, as well as a clear, concise  
explanation of the different states of the patterns in the library so  
folks understand and can control what patterns they are using/viewing.  
It would be *great* if there were some way to configure your default  
view for this filter when you set up an account, for example to only  
see "Reviewed" Patterns. It will be especially important that the  
pattern authors understand the implications of the different steps  
(and the fact that they can skip steps) as they move their patterns  
through the workflow. I am wondering what will be done if a pattern  
author never requests a review--will the patterns be triggered go into  
that state at some point, perhaps after an effort to contact the  
author? I'm guessing some people will author patterns and move on to  
other things, and we may *want* to move the patterns forward even if  
the author can't continue to work with us.

A final question that came up for me is how will the many editors will  
know which pattern to work on with an author. I'm guessing there will  
be a large pool of editors, and if patterns aren't either directed to  
or quickly picked up by a particular person, it may be difficult to  
ensure that a pattern is edited efficiently. We *could* have a system  
where while first all editors are informed that a particular pattern  
is ready for review, and if someone doesn't "pick it up" in a certain  
timeframe (e.g. 3 business days), it is assigned to someone. Then we'd  
need some sort of system to make sure there was an even rotation among  

I think a lot of these are fine points, though that we can continue to  
think through as things move forward--once again, nice work! :)


On Jan 19, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Jonathan Hung wrote:

> Thanks everyone for the great comments and feedback. It appears there
> isn't anything major that needs addressing, so we're going to move
> forward with planning the implementation of the workflow and the
> community features that support it.
> Attached is an updated diagram illustrating the same process but with
> extra elaboration how each stage works.
> If you have feedback still to give, please share them even though
> we're starting work on implementing this.
> Thanks all!
> - Jonathan.
> ---
> Jonathan Hung / jhung.utoronto at gmail.com
> Fluid Project - ATRC at University of Toronto
> Tel: (416) 946-3002
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Colin Clark  
> <colin.clark at utoronto.ca> wrote:
>> Jonathan,
>> You've put together a very clear, easy to use, and forward-looking  
>> plan for
>> our pattern library. I like the way you've balanced openness with  
>> author
>> comfort, providing various checkpoints for drafting, editing, and  
>> sharing
>> ideas with the larger community.
>> Looks like you've received some good feedback. It's really great to  
>> see this
>> vision shaping up. Building a healthy community around the OSDPL is
>> undoubtedly an important part of Fluid's long term sustainability.
>> +1
>> Colin
>> On 14-Jan-09, at 10:55 AM, Jonathan Hung wrote:
>>> Hi everyone.
>>> Over the next 3 to 4 months, we will be making a push to get the  
>>> Open
>>> Source Design Pattern library sustainable. In order to reach that
>>> point, there is a roadmap for the work to be completed. Part of that
>>> roadmap includes the implementation of a flexible pattern workflow
>>> that helps guide a pattern author from draft to publication, while
>>> allowing input from the community throughout the process.
>>> I would like to get your opinion on the following proposed workflow.
>>> The workflow aims to balance the author's comfort and privacy, while
>>> allowing for a larger community to have their input on a design
>>> pattern.
>>> Please examine the attached diagram. The main points to get from  
>>> this
>>> workflow:
>>> - 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.
>>> - 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.
>>> 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). 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).
>>> What are your thoughts on this? Too complicated? Not open enough?
>>> Needs more community involvement during the workflow?
>>> We aim to start work early next week, so your feedback is  
>>> appreciated!
>>> For more information on the workflow, timeline of work, and other
>>> proposed work, please see this wiki page:
>>> http://wiki.fluidproject.org/x/kQNS
>>> - Jonathan.
>>> PS. While designing this workflow I felt like a politician....
>>> Balancing the rights of the individual while benefiting the greater
>>> good. Excuse me while I go and get this awful taste out of my mouth.
>>> :)
>>> ---
>>> Jonathan Hung / jhung.utoronto at gmail.com
>>> Fluid Project - ATRC at University of Toronto
>>> Tel: (416) 946-3002
>>> <OSDPL- 
>>> Workflow3 
>>> .png>_______________________________________________________
>>> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
>>> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
>> ---
>> Colin Clark
>> Technical Lead, Fluid Project
>> Adaptive Technology Resource Centre, University of Toronto
>> http://fluidproject.org
> <OSDPL- 
> Workflow4.png>_______________________________________________________
> fluid-work mailing list - fluid-work at fluidproject.org
> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives,
> see http://fluidproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work

Allison Bloodworth
Senior User Interaction Designer
Educational Technology Services
University of California, Berkeley
(415) 377-8243
abloodworth at berkeley.edu

More information about the fluid-work mailing list