Dockets: A Model for Adding Value to Content

  • Joachim W. Schmidt
  • Hans-Werner Sehring
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1728)

Abstract

Dockets1 are traditional paper means for supporting specific classes of workflows which concentrate on content and its value for individuals and organizations. A docket prescribes and finally documents some content reviewingpro cess which is part of a larger value chain. Since contents represent essential investments they are carefully protected by principles like autonomy and ownership. However, value chains over contents materialize only in open and cooperative scenarios. Therefore, dockets aim at mediating carefully between open content availability for value-addingpro cesses and control for investment protection. In this paper we present dockets as an innovative conceptual model for investment-protectingv alue chains over content. The model is introduced essentially by graphical means and is substantiated by our first experience with docket-driven application development. We demonstrate how our basic docket model scales to support general content management.

Keywords

Content Provider Generic Docket Review Procedure Semistructured Data Docket Framework 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Biron, P.V., Malhotra, A. (eds.): XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes. World Wide Web Consortium Working Draft (1999) http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2
  2. 2.
    Brodie, M.L., Mylopoulos, J., Schmidt, J.W. (eds.): On Conceptual Modeling. Springer (1984)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buco, M.J., Chaar, J.K.: On the Integration of Project, Workflow, and Document Management. Technical Report, IBM (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buneman, P., Deutsch, A., Tan, W.: A Deterministic Model for Semistructured Data. Workshop on Query Processingf or Semistructured Data and Non-Standard Data Formats (1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Communications of the ACM, Special Issue on Traceability. 12 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curran, T., Keller, G., Ladd, A.: SAP R/3 Business Blueprint: Understanding the Business Process Reference Model. Prentice Hall (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deacon, T.W.: The Symbolic Species. W.W. Norton & Co. (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grosso P., Veillard, D. (eds.): XML Fragment Interchange. W3C Working Draft (1999) http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xml-fragment
  9. 9.
    Hayes-Roth, B., Brownston, L.: Multi-Agent Collaboration in Directed Improvisation. Technical Report, Stanford University (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hollingsworth, D.: The Workflow Reference Model. Workflow Management Coalition (1995) http://www.aiim.org/wfmc/standards/docs/tc003v11.pdf
  11. 11.
    Jelliffe, R., Jelliffe, R.A.: The XML and SGML Cookbook: Recipes for Structured Information. Prentice Hall (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Joeris, G.: Change Management Needs Integrated Process and Configuration Management. ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE (1997) 125–141Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Klyne, G.: Protocol-Independent Content Negotiation Framework. Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force http://info.internet.isi.edu:80/0/in-drafts/files/draft-ietf-conneg-requirements-02.txt 261
  14. 14.
    Koksal, P., Arpinar, S.N., Dogac, A.: Workflow History Management. SIGMOD Record 1 (1998) 67–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maler, E., DeRose, S. (eds.): XML Linking Language (XLink) W3C Working Draft (1998) http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xlink
  16. 16.
    Mathiske, B., Matthes, F., Schmidt, J.W.: On Migrating Threads. NGITS 1995Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matthes, F.: Business Conversations: A High-level System Model for Agent Coordination. DBPL 1997: 355–372Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matthes, F., Schmidt, J.W.: Persistent Threads. VLDB 1994: 403–414Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Matthes, F., Schroder, G., Schmidt, J.W.: Tycoon: A Scalable and Interoperable Persistent System Environment. In: M.P. Atkinson (ed.): Fully Integrated Data Environments. Springer-Verlag (1999, in press)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matthes, F., Wegner, H., Hupe, P.: A Process-Oriented Approach to Software Component Definition. CAiSE 1999: 26–40Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Medina-Mora, R., Winograd, T., Flores, R., Flores, F.: The ActionWorkflow Approach to Workflow Management Technology. CSCW 1992Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Muth, P., Weissenfels, J., Gillmann, M., Weikum, G: Workflow History Management in Virtual Enterprises Using a Light-Weight Workflow Management System. RIDE 1999: 148–155Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Palmer, J.D.: Traceability. In: Dorfman M., Thayer, R. H. (eds.): Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press (1997)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prinz, W., Kolvenbach, S.: Support for Workflows in a Ministerial Environment. CSCW 1996: 199–208Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ramesh B., Jarke M.: Towards Reference Models for Requirements Traceability. To appear in: TSE (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Roscheisen, M., Mogensen, C., Winograd, T.: Shared Web Annotations As A Platform for Third-Party Value-Added Information Providers: Architecture, Protocols, and Usage Examples. Technical Report (1994) http://www-diglib.stanford.edu/diglib/pub/reports/commentor.html
  27. 27.
    Roscheisen, M., Winograd, T., Paepcke A.: Content Ratings and Other Third-Party Value-Added Information-Definingan Enabling Platform. D-Lib Magazine (1995) http://mirrored.ukoln.ac.uk/lis-journals/dlib/dlib/dlib/august95/stanford/08roscheisen.html
  28. 28.
    Ryu, Y.U.: Specification of Contractual Obligations in Formal Business Communication. DKE 26(3): 309–326 (1998)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schmidt, J.W., Schroder, G., Niederée, C., Matthes, F.: Linguistic and Architectural Requirements for Personalized Digital Libraries. Int. J. Digit. Libr. 1 (1997) 89–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Warburg Electronic Library, http://www.sts.tu-harburg.de/projects/WEL
  31. 31.
    Winograd, T.: A Language/Action Perspective on the Design of Cooperative Work. Human-Computer Interaction 1 (1987-88) 3–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yu, E.S.K., Mylopoulos, J.: From E-R to “A-R” — ModellingS trategic Actor Relationships for Business Process Reengineering. ER 1994: 548–565Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joachim W. Schmidt
    • 1
  • Hans-Werner Sehring
    • 1
  1. 1.Software Systems Institute (AB 4.02)Technical University Hamburg-HarburgGermany

Personalised recommendations