The uPortal Roadmap uPortal Software Developers Meeting Jim Farmer, Mike Ivanov, and Ken Weiner for the uPortal Software Developers Meeting Monday, 9 February 2004 Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona USA

Some history Version Date Enhancements 1.0 Jul 2000 1.5 Feb 2001 Roles 1.6 Jun 2001 Performance 2.0 Feb 2002 Introduced XSLT architecture 2.1 Dec 2002 Remote channel, Web proxy, statistics 2.2 Jan 2004 Internationalization, WSRP, aggregated layout

Purpose of version 2.2 Introduce significant new features that will require further development. Support exploration of these new features by users Fully define how subsequent versions of these features should be implemented Provide guidance for development of portal-based applications

Version 2.2 Internationalization Remote portlet “Integrated modes” Portal framework Language choice algorithm Channel awareness Remote portlet WSRP-compliance limited to uPortal remote channel functions “Integrated modes” Preferences mode--user view plus icons and markers--to change user layout rather than current iconic layout more

Version 2.2 Aggregated Layout “Layout fragments” consisting of tab and columns Content “pushed” based on group membership, layout fragment Enforce “directed” layout through restrictions (priority range, depth, group, immutable, unremovable and hidden restrictions)

Limitations of internationalization Language preferences of browsers inconsistent, numerous; not implemented in 2.2 Java localization supports only two-character language codes; higher education may need three-character codes of ISO 639 January 2003 as adopted by NISO (libraries) XLIFF editor not yet developed or integrated with Kajita update utility

Limitations of “integrated modes” Not clear which information should be passed between the Java framework and XSLT style sheets (depends upon future channel developer needs) Possible improvements in user interaction

Limitations of aggregated layout “Layout fragment” limited to “tab and specified columns and channels” Layout restrictions supported if specified by portal administrator Need to further enhance the graphical user interface for publish and subscribe of layout fragments (based on user experience and suggestions)

Lessons from aggregated layout Layout control needs to be delegated to departments and faculty rather than portal administrator Unclear how to visualize impact of layout restrictions; that is, final layout effect of different layout restrictions since they interact with a user’s personal choices and the priorities and restrictions previously assigned to tabs, columns, and channels or portlets

The future – version 2.3 In response to Sakai project, implement JSR 168 without concern about performance. May use Pluto code from Apache Software Foundation Further develop remote portlet following WSRP specification Deploy further development of 2.2 features if available

The future – version 3.0 Implement JSR 168 compliance, also likely using Pluto (subject to January testing) Performance improvements Deploy further development of 2.2 features as available

uPortal and JSR 168

Developing features WSRP and JSR-168 as reference implementations, experience suggest Internationalization Use of XLIFF specification Implement browser language preference if reasonable User interface Extend “integrated modes” Modify as experience suggests Cornell channel volume, Hull studies, accessibility

WSRP support

Sakai funded development January – September 2004 JSR 168 for versions 2.3 and 3.0 OSIDs implementation if defined and as needed January – December 2005 (Proposed) GUI for User priority ranges Layout fragment constructor Node restrictions editor Layout fragment subscription support User-modifiable layout fragments Layout fragment support for flexible fragment depth Layout filtering Layout fragment set support Delayed authentication support

Likely uPortal priorities Stability Performance Features Product support Documentation Training

Likely JA-SIG priorities Applications implemented as portlets or portal channels, for example: OSPI ePortfolio (Indiana University) Sakai collaboration “tools” based on the University of Michigan’s CHEF tools Sakai Course Management System CuCMS Content Management System (Columbia University) Services oriented architecture based on Web Services (XML, SOAP, WS-Security, SAML)

Keep in mind … JA-SIG priorities and activities represents the interests, needs, and resources of the participants. Changing needs in higher and further education under increasing pressure for productivity improvements. Commercial firms are still trying to accommodate to open source software development.

The end jim farmer jxf@immagic.com +1-202-296-2807

Permissions JA-SIG publications are in the public domain and can be freely reproduced, These presentations may contain material reproduced with permission of the Copyright owner. Users are requested to comply with any copyright restrictions and to appropriately reference any materials that are used in their own works.