[OpenISO] Software and Documentation for procedures?

[Norbert Bollow]

I wrote:
> "Std Lib0" <stdlib0 at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > A system that seems to handle well the submission, review, comments,
> > publication etc is PeerToPatent (http://www.peertopatent.org/).
> > It's very open and all discussions are logged, commented and publicly
> > accessible by anyone on the Internet.
> > 
> > - it seems to have a nice software to handle all the lifecycle of draft
> > submissions.
> > - some documentation on the process is here:
> > -- http://dotank.nyls.edu/communitypatent/system.html
> > -- http://communitypatent.typepad.com/project_docs/
> > 
> > Does anyone know how to obtain the PeerToPatent software???
> 
> I agree with taking inspiration from what they're doing, but
> I don't expect OpenISO.org to be able to avoid developing a
> software system of its own, specifically designed to support
> whatever workflow patterns turn out to be appropriate for what
> we want to achieve.
> 
> I would suggest that we should simply work essentially manually
> for now, using this mailing list to document what we're doing,
> until we have a better understanding of what we're trying to do
> and of what workflow patterns are supportive of these goals.

Update:  "Developing a software system of our own" of course does
not imply starting from scratch and developing yet another CRM
system.  Rather we should build upon an existing CRM system by
adding custom modules or whatever to implement the workflow that
we want.

Even though we don't yet have any real experience of that the
OpenISO.org workflow will be like, it is clear that we will
certainly want to have the ability to collaboratively edit
specification documents, procedures documents, edorsement
documents, problem report documents etc.

So I think it is clear that it would be very useful to have some kind
of "online editing" app for drafts of specification are procedure
documents etc.

The "online editing" would be similar to how you edit a page in a
wiki, but with the additional constraint that the text should be not
only suitable for converting to HTML but also suitable for displaying
in plain text format suitable for quoting in text emails.

The ability for edit-locks to be restricted to sections of a document
rather than applying to a document in its entirety would be a big plus.

In addition, the "online editing" system should understand a document
numbering/labeling system as proposed here
http://openiso.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-September/000014.html

The numbered drafts mentioned there would be somehow official drafts
based on which people would be able to use "online editing" system
to freely, possily collaboratively, produce proposals for modified
versions.

When the official, numbered draft versions are viewed on the
OpenISO.org website, a list of existing modified draft versions
should also be displayed, with a summary (provided by whoever
created the document editing branch) of the changes.

Greetings,
Norbert.


-- 
Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>                      http://Norbert.ch
President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG    http://SIUG.ch
Working on establishing a non-corrupt and
truly /open/ international standards organization  http://OpenISO.org