Translations.com and FatWire Software announced the debut of a combined product offering to eliminate barriers to cooperation between global resources. The integration of these two products provides a collaboration-based solution for localizing global content into multiple languages. The two companies partnered to develop the FatWire Adaptor for GlobalLink, which embeds GlobalLink functionality in Content Server. From within the Content Server interface, users can identify which assets need to be sent out for localization and keep track of the progress of previously localized assets to facilitate updates and revisions. Assets requiring localization are automatically extracted from Content Server and routed to the appropriate user for localization. Upon completion of localization tasks, GlobalLink reinserts the asset into the appropriate place in Content Server. The solution provides workflow integration so that a localization task can be added to one or more existing workflows in FatWire Content Server. Then, whenever an asset reaches that workflow task, it will be sent out for localization through GlobalLink. Upon the return of the localized version of the asset, GlobalLink will initiate a configured workflow. http://www.fatwire.com, http://www.translations.com
Page 411 of 931
Open Text Corporation (TSX:OTC)(NASDAQ:OTEX) said it has committed to offering Open Text’s Artesia Digital Asset Management (DAM) solution for Microsoft SQL Server 2005 database platform. To facilitate deployment of the combined solution, Microsoft has developed the SQL Server Migration Accelerator (SSMA) tool, software that accelerates the migration of back-end data to the Microsoft SQL Server 2005 platform. The SSMA tool reduces the cost and time required for analysis, migration and follow-up testing, streamlining the transition of customers’ DAM solutions to the SQL Server platform. The Open Text Artesia Digital Media Group helps customers address the growing competitive and regulatory pressures to improve the management of digital media content. This group also leads Open Text’s horizontal strategy for digital media as a key component of ECM, and champions the unique ECM requirements of media companies worldwide. Open Text anticipates an accelerated initial rollout of solutions in calendar Q1, 2006. http://www.opentext.com
Altova announced that Altova XMLSpy 2006 includes full support for the newly released Microsoft Visual Studio 2005. From directly within the Visual Studio 2005 development environment, developers can access the functionality of XMLSpy 2006 to build XML-based applications. In addition to Visual Studio 2005
integration, the new 2006 version contains updated XSLT 2.0, XPath 2.0, and XQuery support in compliance with the latest World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Working Drafts released on September 15, 2005, as well as schema-awareness in its XSLT 2.0 and XQuery engines. Similar to its support for Microsoft Visual Studio .NET 2003, XMLSpy 2006 provides “deep” integration with Visual Studio 2005. This gives Microsoft developers seamless access to the editing views and
development tools of XMLSpy 2006 in the same environment where they develop .NET Framework-based applications. XMLSpy 2006 is currently available for purchase in both Professional and Enterprise Editions with (USD) prices for a single-user license starting at $499 and $999 respectively. Customers with a valid Altova
Support and Maintenance Package (SMP) are eligible to update to XMLSpy 2006 software free of charge. http://www.altova.com
Quadralay Corporation and XyEnterprise announced a strategic partnership that will combine XyEnterprise’s Content@ software with Quadralay’s WebWorks AutoMap. These technologies streamline business processes, providing information-management capabilities and automated online publishing for midsize and large Adobe FrameMaker and Microsoft Word authoring groups. XyEnterprise’s Content@ is a content management application that manages structured and unstructured content as whole documents or reusable components that can then be shared across multiple delivery channels. With FrameMaker Application Interfaces, content developers, managers and publishers have instant connectivity between Adobe FrameMaker and Content@. Additional support for FrameMaker’s “Book” format means any FrameMaker document can be tracked and versioned within the Content@ application. Content@ also supports many Microsoft products and has several new offerings that support Microsoft’s “XML” based applications. WebWorks AutoMap streamlines the traditional ePublishing process by extending control over formatting, look and feel, and content targeting. The joint solution is immediately available. ,
Percussion Software announced that it has formed a strategic partnership with Ephox, provider of XML and XHTML authoring tools for enterprises. At the same time, Percussion introduced Rhythmyx 5.7, the newest version of its Enterprise Content Management System. Rhythmyx 5.7 provides new content creation/editing and analysis tools, features a new cross-platform rich text editor, EditLive! for Java 5.0 from Ephox, which offers content authoring capabilities, international language support and accessibility features for Section 508 compliance. EditLive! for Java 5.0, is certified on all Rhythmyx-supported browsers and platforms – including Netscape, Internet Explorer and Firefox for Windows and Safari for Mac. Rhythmyx 5.7 also adds Content Lifecycle Analysis, a capability that allows Web site managers to track and analyze content as it proceeds through the production lifecycle. http://www.percussion.com, http://www.ephox.com
We hope to see you at our upcoming Boston conference. But whether you join us or not, you can contribute to the keynote discussion by including questions in a comment on this blog entry. Below is the session description with links to the participant’s bios and their blogs. Let us know what technologies you think we should be discussing. Comments and trackbacks are on.
Keynote Panel: New Technologies You Need to Consider for Content Management Strategies
The pace of information technology development continues to increase as organizations develop experience in implementing content applications, and as software vendors vie to incorporate their customer’s feedback into product technologies ahead of the competition. As most enterprise applications become more content-oriented, content technology developments are coming from a broader base of suppliers and developers. This session will look at a couple of technologies relevant to content-oriented applications you may not be aware of, or may not think of in the context of content management strategies. Complementing this session are the analyst panel, and the keynote debate on Enterprise use of Blog and Wiki technology.
Moderator: Frank Gilbane, Conference Chair, Editor & Publisher, The Gilbane Report — Blog
Jon Udell, Lead Analyst, InfoWorld — Blog
Coach K. Wei, Founder and CTO, Nexaweb — Blog
Jean-Philippe Gauthier, General Manager, Sympatico / MSN
Bob Wyman, CTO and Co-founder, PubSub — Blog
We are getting ready for our upcoming Boston conference and hope to see you there. But whether you join us or not, you can contribute to the debate by commenting on this blog entry. Below is the session description with links to the participant’s bios and their blogs. Comments and trackbacks are on.
Keynote Debate: Blog, Wiki, and RSS Technology – Are they Enterprise Ready? Applicable? Or a Passing Tempest in a Teacup?
Most of you have probably not seriously considered using these technologies in enterprise applications. Yet there are companies using these technologies for collaboration, knowledge management, and publishing applications in corporate environments, and there are vendors marketing products based on these to businesses like yours. Do these companies only represent the experimental fringe, or are they early adopters of technologies that will soon be part of every IT department’s bag of tricks? In this session we’ll take a look at the suitability of these for corporate use and hear from both skeptics and proponents of, for example enterprise or group blogs. You will come away from this session able to discuss these issues with your colleagues back in the office.
Moderator: Frank Gilbane, Conference Chair — Blog
David Berlind, Executive Editor, ZDNet — Blog
Ross Mayfield, CEO, Socialtext, Inc. — Blog
Bill Zoellick Senior Analyst, The Gilbane Report — Blog
Charlie Wood, Principal, Spanning Partners, LLC — Blog
Two of the topics in the title are things we normally don’t touch in this blog. However, the tempest over Massachusetts’s OpenDocumentFormat decision is inflaming passions almost as much as religious and political issues do. In fact, I am writing about it because I woke up irritated at how ill-informed and irrelevant so much of the discussion about the state’s decision is. (Not a good way to start a blog entry!) I promised myself not to go on for more than the length of a reasonable blog-entry, so rather than dig into all the weeds, here is a short history lesson to bring out the big picture, and hopefully keep the debate focused on the real issue for Massachusetts’s and others contemplating similar decisions.
When we (in the standards community) debated open document standards 20 years ago, there was a religious and political fervor fueling the arguments of both sides. Our side (the SGML side, which included Tim Bray and Jean Paoli, now the chief XML people at Sun and Microsoft respectively), argued that nobody’s content should be held hostage by being stuck in a vendor’s proprietary format, and that the solution was a standard set of rules for describing whatever kind format was necessary that vendors were free to implement. The other side (the ODA “Office Document Architecture” side) agreed with that, however they thought the solution was for a bunch of vendors to get together and agree on a format that, instead of being proprietary to a single vendor, was proprietary to a self-defined group of vendors. This solution was even worse than the status quo for lots of reasons (lowest common denominator functionality, enhancements by slow international committee, unhealthy cabal-like motivations, …). At the time I thought of ODA as the soviet approach, and the SGML approach as the democratic approach. Fortunately, the SGML approach won, and that set in motion the developments that have given us XML today.
You can tell where I am going with this. But there is one more relevant aspect of this history to mention. One of the main arguments behind ODA was that the SGML approach was just too difficult to implement. They had a point, you have to pay for the freedom of flexibility. Their mistake was thinking there was an alternative that could anticipate all reasonable requirements. It can cost even more when you just can’t implement what you need to.
The situation today is a little different, but the need for organizations to be able to do whatever they want with their own content is exactly the same. The imposition of any single schema/format on all documents in any organization simply won’t work. Anybody who has been involved in helping organizations build IT applications knows that exceptions are the rule, and you can’t legislate them out of existence even in authoritarian corporate environments. A good decision for the state would be to simply require all documents to conform to one of a number of publicly documented and freely available XML Schemas – who cares what software did or did not create the content or did or did not design the schema? Certainly there are some complex details to work out, but there is no mystery.
We have had debates on this topic at our Boston conference last year and in San Francisco in the Spring, where there was more agreement than disagreement between Microsoft (Jean) and Sun (Tim) and the issues raised were refreshingly free from politics. It’s too bad we didn’t record it.
There is plenty of coverage on this topic. We have more comments and pointers, but also see Jon Udell and David Berlind.
Subscribe to the Gilbane Advisor
