Has there been any progress on a possible taxonomy shift for forums? I'd like to see ideas and talk about them. Mostly, I have been commenting (kvetching?) about the loss of the OO and PDSOE forums because of the focus they provided. Today I stumbled on OpenEdge Cloud and Arcade while looking for something else and I see that it is full of discussions on OERA and competing ideas. That isn't either Cloud or Arcade. Nothing is getting posted to it ... in part perhaps because it is mislabeled. I don't remember what the old forum was called unless it was something about architecture, but this is another low volume, but good focus topic area.
Do you want specific proposals? Is there a way to see the old list?
Consulting in Model-Based Development, Transformation, and Object-Oriented Best Practice http://www.cintegrity.com
As I still have access to the old PSDN forums, I went back into it and checked where the OERA related stuff were located. As a matter of fact, all OERA related docs were in PSDN > OpenEdge > Architecture, SaaS & Cloud Computing, including the famous AutoEdge|TheFactory... The forum itself was named "Architecture, SaaS & Cloud Computing"
So as a quick fix what about renaming our existing OpenEdge Cloud & Arcade to OpenEdge Architecture, Arcase, SaaS & Cloud computing?
For me to provide the old forum architecture will be very challenging as we didn't even had/have a sitemap at all...
When it comes to the taxonomy itself, no decision has been made yet. Also, before making changes to our new Community taxonomy, we'll run online calls specifically focused on the Community where we'd like to gather more input from community users.
Unfortunately I couldn't book these online calls within our Community calendar due to a bug related to timezones. We got the fix at the end of last week. So very soon I'll book these online calls.
If you have specific proposals, please fell free to share through this thread.
While I am all for the calls, I think taxonomy is a matter that needs some time to consider and benefits from give and take of ideas. I would publish a proposal here and then let us critique it.
Would you consider documenting the old structure, minus the products no longer owned by PSC, and publishing it? That might help in triggering ideas for what to do in the new structure.
Yes... I'll send it to you
I might not be the only one interested ...
I've done a quick pass and have couple of thoughts. The Business User/Technical User split is an interesting one, although I'm not sure that the division of the Wiki and Documents is so clear, i.e., it is possible that split should be inverted.
In Business Users, I am less happy about what is there. What is "Pacific Apps" if Pacific includes all PSC products except DD drivers? Isn't Data Integration usually technical, except for the not yet released Easyl, which might deserve its own forum? What is Application Development to a Business User? Mobile also seems technical. BPM is fine, but shouldn't there also be BRM? What is the relationship of Deployment in BU to OpenEdge Deployment in TU. I agree that it is a good idea to have a place where non-technical users can post and not feel like they are in with a bunch of geeks, but, I'm not sure these are the right categories.
In Technical Users, I only have a couple of quibbles with what is there. One is that the relationship of OpenEdge General and Technical Users General is vague. I would merge these (although there may be posts which should be moved elsewhere). My other issue is that Architecture, Cloud Computing, and Arcade is really merging three things with only the vaguest relationship to each other. Architecture, at the least, should be its own forum.
Missing from the current classification are:
Developer's Studio for OpenEdge (possibly IDE in general)
Dynamics and ADM2
GUI for .NET
Upgrade and Migrate
Each of these seems to me to be a clear area of separate expertise, focus, and interest. Munging them in with the rest means having to notice a lot of posts about things which are not of interest and this dilutes the attention which one pays ... especially for a Progress employee. We used to get quite a few posts on the PDSOE forum answered by PDSOE developers, but are they supposed to read everything on the OE Development forum now?
Of course, one problem is that threads on these old forums have been merged into existing forums and I suspect that unmerging them will be difficult. At best, I would think one would have to reimport all the old stuff into new forums and the categorize everything post go live by hand. Pretty yucky, for sure.
The other problem with adding a bunch more forums is the presentation showing a limited number of forums by recency of post. In order to get people to post to the right forum, one needs to have obvious affordance. If there is a limitation in the platform that one can only have five or six forums per group and have them all show, I would suggest maybe:
OpenEdge Development - General
Developer's Studio for OpenEdge
OpenEdge General / Technical Users Group General
OpenEdge Development - Special Topics
Dynamics and ADM2
GUI for .NET
Upgrade and Migrate
Other Products (needs a better name)
Data Direct Connect
Business Rules Management System - Corticon
Cloud Computing & Arcade
Business Process Management
Blast, the formatting got rid of all my indents. Let me try the list again:
Given the volume of RDBMS posts historically (not much), I think sub-forums for that is overkill. And until this platform can display content from multiple forums on a single screen like a modern web forum should, the fewer forums the better.
And while you're discussing taxonomy, this forum needs to be much more discoverable. Even when you know it exists it's hard to find. All forums should be reachable from a common root, not hidden off sidebar links where no one would think to look for them.
One of the purposes of subforums is to subdivide the traffic so that it does not become overwhelming, but I don't think that has been a big issue in the past life of PSDN. Perhaps Jean's cheerleading will increase traffic, but I don't think sheer volume is a big factor at this point on whether to lump or subdivide.
There are two other reasons to subdivide, though. One is to provide focus. E.g., a PDSOE forum being separate provides a place that PDSOE developers can focus on without feeling like they need to wade through a lot of irrelevant traffic. The flip side of this is that this clear focus tells the user, "clearly, this is the right place to ask this question".
I wonder if one of the solutions for discoverability isn't to have one forum root. I.e., to make the top level Forum|Wiki|Documents|Ideas and then, under Forum to have Community|Business|OE General|OE Special|Database|Other ... preferably with some better names. Then, as long as we can show 7 forums at each level, everything can be seen without flipping to a second or third page and, at most, one has to drill down one level.
Thomas, thank you very much for sharing your extensive perspectives on our Community architecture...
I'll need some time to "digest" it and due to the fact that I'll be on vacations starting tomorrow evening and still have a few things I need to sort out, I'll only be able to get back to you in January but that shouldn't prevent others to contribute to this thread.
Rest assured that I'll get back to you.
Where did you get the idea that you got to go on vacation? :)
I wonder who suggested me to take 2 weeks off...
In fact I'm taking my "summer vacation" as in June 2013 when the decision was made to move forward with the new Community and me taking the "cheerleader" role, with the deadline to have the new Community up and running at Exchange 2013, I made the decision to cancel my summer vacation.
And to make it a real summer vacation, we decided to go to Montréal where currently the temperature is between -15 to -25°C... But i'm sure iwe'll have good fun as Paul Koufalis (Paul° offered to tour us in snowy Montréal...
I have been reminded by new traffic on this thread
that one of the classifications on a revised structure should be Documentation Feedback.