[AG-TECH] RE: development directions

[Jennifer Teig von Hoffman]

Hi Ivan,

Thanks, that's helpful. Here are a couple more questions and comments:

Ivan R. Judson wrote:

>>Given that design docs and a fully-functional alpha are due
>>out soon, we
>>seem to have run out of time for any substantial requirement
>>gathering
>>for AG 2.0. However, it does seem to me that there are a number of
>>    
>>
>Sure, first however, I think it's important to keep in mind that we are
>trying to *always* take recommendations or suggestions for requirements for
>the next version. We have had more than a year to gather requirements for
>2.0, including SCGlobal experiences. We should have a very rich set of
>requirements that represents good stuff.
>
Could you give us a sense of how these requirements were collected, and 
how decisions were made about what would go into the 2.0 version? To the 
best of my knowledge, the only formal exercise for gathering 
requirements were the "town hall" meetings on the AG, which seemed 
targeted only at technical users.

A tangent here: we SC Global 2003 folks are going to be meeting in early 
January to talk about our software requirements and timeframe.

>>    * Workspace docking (especially given interest in that
>>demo at SC02)
>>    
>>
>
>This will be present in the 2.0 alpha; that is the ability to author docked
>tools will be supported. In order for this to work we have created a Virtual
>Venues Client which is not a web browser. This client has a dock where
>docked tools live.
>  
>
Related to this: PowerPoint slides are a mundane issue, but a hot topic 
nonetheless (and have been the bane of the existence of many a node op). 
What's the plan for supporting distributed PowerPoint or something like 
it? Should the community be looking to migrate to Remote PowerPoint? 
(Shameless plug: there's a guide to RPPT available on the AGDP now.)

>>    * Visual indication of who is speaking at any given time
>>    
>>
>
>We will be able to support this easily; however it won't be present in the
>alpha. There is just too much too fast. Vote early and often to prioritize
>things for the beta release.
>
This is probably the most frequently-mentioned issue among casual users 
(assuming the network's all good and nobody's got weird camera angles).

>>    * Voyager
>>    
>>
>
>Voyager is not part of the alpha; it is being worked on separately from the
>Access Grid and once 2.0 is ready for it's release it will be present in the
>Virtual Venues as a Application Service.
>
Any timeline available on the work on Voyager?

Also, a new question: Most things I've heard about the alpha at this 
point have been centered around the client. What's the plan for 
server-side stuff, ie venues server design/development tools?

- Jennifer