My Visions - GullFOSS

RSS Feed

Atom Feed

Bookmark to Delicious

More Flickr photos tagged with openoffice

Today's Page Hits: 51

« Easy Developer's... | Main | DirectX-based slides... »

Monday, 23 Jul 2007

My Visions

Kay Ramme

I recently stumbled over a broader Gnome vision regarding an Online Desktop (see here), which sounds reasonable new and ambitious.

I just would like to take the opportunity to present my very own little ideas regarding OOo, in no particular order.

All OOo is going to be MVC (Model View Controller).
There are no different applications any more, but just work approaches, representing the former Calc, Writer etc., internally they are using the same data structures (Models, Views, Controllers), e.g. the same tables in Calc as in Writer as in Impress etc.
The API allows objects to be combined in a linear independent way, e.g. creating a paragraph to be added to various tables, documents, sheets, presentation etc.
The architecture is strictly event-driven, including I/O. No polling, hanging etc. any more because of slow or failing I/O.
Everybody is using the new Uno threading-model, avoiding hand crafted thread related programming mostly everywhere.
The GUI is described in a purely declarative language, e.g. as XUL.
The build system uses (GNU) make only, relies on dependencies solely and gives useful progress information ("compiling <module>/source/<foo.cxx>" etc.) only, not cluttering the console anymore.
We have unit tests for (nearly) everything, so that changes can be verified in concise scenarios.
There is in fact no difference between a document and an extension, both can be opened temporarily (file->open) but also be deployed permanently (tools->Extension Manager).
OOo would be available as classic installation sets (.rpm, .deb, msi, ...), suitable for the apt/sources.lst, as Java Web Start Technology etc.
There is a marketplace where open source developers as well as commercial entities can offer their services.

Some of the items are in the works or at least people are thinking about them, others may be new. If anybody is interested, I am sure I can come up with more ...

Many visions etc. are in the heads (fingers?) of the community, and may not (yet) be written down explicitly. I am pretty sure that, if asking, most people can give a list of what's coming and what they are currently thinking about.

tags: architecture openoffice.org vision

Posted by Kay Ramme on 23 Jul 2007 | PermaLink |

To Delicious |

Digg this | Comments[8]

Comments

John McCreesh said: In addition to Kay's wonderful ideas:

OOo2010 is completely component based. If you only need a simple text editor (Notepad, gEdit...) then that's all you would see in your OOo. As you required more advanced features then 'your' OOo would grow to match: e.g. you need a table? a table editor component is added to your OOo.
Components run in a browser or on a desktop (aka operating system) or on a mobile phone or OLPC or ...
Components are either available on-demand from the web or can be installed from the web / CD for off-line use. Components would include documentation
Components could be updated / translated / released independently of each other (the loader would be smart enough to understand dependencies)
Components would be simple to develop in a variety of languages. As an entry level, it would be possible to record a macro in OOoBasic, edit it in an IDE, and turn it into a component.
Components would be available from the community and from other repositories
Components could be used directly inside other applications
As Kay says, the idea of a having separate Writer, Calc, etc disappears. Your desktop just has the tools you use. Core OOo is tiny (runs on a digital watch)

Some things do not change:

All data is held in ODF
There is a seagull somewhere in the logo :-)

John

Posted by John McCreesh on July 23, 2007 at 09:05 PM CEST #

Kay Ramme said: John, I completely follow your ideas. Would it make sense to come together with other stakeholders to develop these "little" visions / ideas somewhat further? We may actually reach a state where we want to proclaim them as one possible set of goals to be achieved mid- to long-term. Kay

Posted by Kay Ramme on July 24, 2007 at 02:04 PM CEST #

Louis said: I also concur with Kay and John, and would suggest we discuss these ideas on an OOo list and certainly at OOoCon.

Posted by Louis on July 24, 2007 at 07:23 PM CEST #

Kay Ramme said: Louis, would it make sense to create an according wiki page and may be to discuss this on the accompanying talk page? This would allow to work on the document collaboratively ensuring at least some outcome ;-) Regards Kay

Posted by Kay Ramme on July 25, 2007 at 12:15 PM CEST #

Louis said: A wiki would indeed make sense, structured and informed by your knowledge of the architecture and technology at play.

Posted by Louis on July 25, 2007 at 02:17 PM CEST #

Bob Harvey said: The comments about re-using table code in all applications reminds me of Ashton-Tate's Framemaker, which was probably the purest outliner I have ever worked with. The outline descended into text containers, spreadsheets, and graphics containers more or less seamlessly. I have always wanted to be able to insert the result of a spreadsheet calculation as a field in a text document or mail merge. Taken to its logical conclusion, the ideas presented would make Draw into a DTP package, because text boxes, tables, images, etc would all work just as they do in DTP. For all this to happen would be a root-and-branch re-write, though. For a start, we would need a complete and extensible style heirarchy (see issue 44879 for example). I'd also like to see voice input and output become seamless parts of the document structure too.

Posted by Bob Harvey on July 26, 2007 at 12:33 PM CEST #

Kay Ramme said: Hi Bob,

love to hear your comments regarding insertion of calculation results into text documents etc. It seems I am not the only wanting the "applications" to converge ... ;-)

Regarding Draw becoming DTP, just include in your thoughts "form controls", take a brief look at Mozillas XUL and its relationship to HTML, carry forward the thoughts to ODF and see what you get ... I may go to resolve the puzzle in my next blog ;-)

I took a brief look at 44879, your comments sound very reasonable, though I am no "text" expert.

Just created a wiki page to continue discussions and to work on a common understanding: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Our_Visions

Kay

Posted by Kay Ramme on July 26, 2007 at 01:04 PM CEST #

Fasse said: Kay wrote: "There are no different applications any more, but just work approaches, representing the former Calc, Writer etc., internally they are using the same data structures (Models, Views, Controllers), e.g. the same tables in Calc as in Writer as in Impress etc." That would be a wonderful application. As a normal user it would be easier to handle. I mustn't think if I use calc, writer or impress for my work. I simply start OO and start working. Maybe with table and cells like calc or simply a text like writer or both.

Posted by Fasse on August 01, 2007 at 11:23 AM CEST #