Slashdot Mirror


Cross Platform Document Management Systems?

Alan asks: "I'm looking for a way to do document management at the office. We have windows people and linux people, some writing documents that are a few lines (developer notes for example) and others are full of charts, graphs, etc. Currently we have a file server that has shares set up for the documentation, but it lacks any sort of revision control, and with the salespeople writing in Microsoft Word there are cross-platform issues. We were thinking of setting up an wiki or an everything-based site, but as it is only text, it's not good enough for everyone. There is also the matter of getting our master documentation (which is in PDF format) accessable to everyone as well, possibly in an XML format that can be imported into indesign or Pagemaker or something. There are lots of solutions that work for different departments and different systems, but it would be nice to have something that works for everyone."

32 comments

  1. Framebuilder by renehollan · · Score: 2

    cross-platform independent format (dunno if there's a Linux version, though).

    --
    You could've hired me.
    1. Re:Framebuilder by renehollan · · Score: 2

      Oh, I just suggested a cross-platform format... Use something like Clearcase, CVS, RCS, or PVCS for version control.

      --
      You could've hired me.
  2. PVCS by Oily+Tuna · · Score: 1

    PVCS
    or any one of a million other source/document control systems.

    --
    Mmmmmmm ... sushi.
  3. Document management by JMZero · · Score: 1

    Our company uses a program we wrote for document management. It handles authentication, keeping track of documents attached to files, and shells out to Word/other programs to create and edit documents.

    Downloading/saving files is done via HTTP (users can work via the same system at home).

    That said, our company likes making our own wheels. In the end we find it's less work (especially on a simple project like this).

    --
    Let's not stir that bag of worms...
  4. Xerox Docushare by juliao · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you consider getting a commercial product, try Xerox's Docushare.

    It's web based, features access controls and revisions, HTML rendering of Office documents, and a lot of other nice things.

    Best simple document management system I've seen that scales from small teams to large groups.

  5. PDF for everyone? by CounterZer0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why not just stick with PDF for everybody? There are plenty of free (beer/speech) utilites out there to make any document a PDF in Linux, as well as (costly perhaps) Acrobat for Windows. That solves you're common format problem...and you could use any one of the bazillions of version control systems to manage the PDFs.

  6. Simple by BRO_HAM · · Score: 3, Interesting



    Here is the best system for managing documents, it's simple, yet very effective. The technology or database here is a matter of preference - let's address "business flow".

    You need a single directory to store all of your documents - no subdirectories. The categorization should be held in the database. This makes for simple backups and not having to heavily integrate your application with the server's file system.

    You should have 5 ways to access the files - categorical, by date, by "uploader", by type, and a search function that indexes the complete text held within each document. Verity has a very nice offering for indexing MANY different types of files.

    All of the 5 different methods of access should be linked. For instance, if I am browsing categorically and I run across a documentation style I like in particular, I should be able to click a link that takes me to the "uploader" filter that will show me all the other documents that individual uploaded.

    Another example is if I did a full-text search for "widgets 123" and had a long listing of documents, you should list the categories they reside in so the user can click that category and be taken to all of the documents in that category.

    Two phrases should be at the top of every thought you have regarding this system:

    Fully Integrated
    Stupid dumb easy to use

    Adam.

    --


    my sig is so witty and fun - it tickles almost everyone who reads it.
    1. Re:Simple by sigwinch · · Score: 2
      You need a single directory to store all of your documents - no subdirectories.
      That's useful if all of your documents consist of exactly one file. Which is to say worthless in the real world.
      --

      --
      Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end. ;-)

    2. Re:Simple by BRO_HAM · · Score: 1

      I'm not quite understanding what you mean?? I'm saying that you hold your categorical "directory structure" in your database.
      Here is a quick primer on database-driven categories. One table, three fields:
      primary key parent key name

      All of your root level categories would have a parent key of 0. Your subcategories would have a parent-key of whatever their parent categories primary-key is. You just need to write recursive SQL to traverse up and down the parent-child structure and it actually works quite well. All of the logic sits snuggly in your database.

      --


      my sig is so witty and fun - it tickles almost everyone who reads it.
    3. Re:Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think they are saying that if you have HTML pages you're going to have images, external CSS files, and such. If one document were always one file then putting them in one directory would be OK, but it's not.

      I completely agree with you about using a flat structure for holding information and abstracting the categories. The point is that you can achieve a flat structure and still give each document it's own container (a directory, in this case).

      Directories don't necesarily reflect categories.

    4. Re:Simple by sigwinch · · Score: 2
      I'm saying that you hold your categorical "directory structure" in your database.
      Sorry -- I misunderstood. I read "no subdirectories" and had this awful vision of a completely flat repositority containing a gigantic pile of files. Hence the violent reaction.

      The more I think about it, the more I like your approach. The files can be indexed and organized into arbitrary structures, and the RDBMS does all the heavy lifting.

      --

      --
      Kuro5hin.org: where the good times never end. ;-)

  7. I'm I the only one who thought of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Format documents in HTML. Simple, supports practically all platforms out there. Most tools will export to HTML these days...

    (Or, alternatively, PDF, which is equally well supported. Though you lose the ability to browse the documentation off your favorite web browser.)

    For revision control: Try CVS with SSH (instead of RSH) for updating. Cheap. Effective. Highly portable. Add a little script so that it automatically checks out the latest versions of whatever is checked in, and checks them out into a public place -- perhaps into your intra-web-server's (Apache's) directory.

    For your sales people, add commands (batch or bash scripts) to create/checkin files to their windows explorer browser commands list... So they can easily update/checkin files using their winX click and drool interfaces... (But, of course, it only works for the "right" file types...)

    1. Re:I'm I the only one who thought of this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet - save them as HTML fragments. Keeping your source data clean is of utmost importance.

  8. Lotus' Domino.Doc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Web based, which solves the cross-platform bit. Includes a document distiller so that it will render HTML for documents thrown into it, which saves the bother of having to download the attachment. Will render a PDF, realtime, for anything else. Does a lot of other things, too. (Metadata, tracking, revision control, check-in/out, restricted access, ACLs,

    http://www.lotus.com/home.nsf/welcome/domdoc

    You probably won't find a good, free one, because lots of businesses (like legal departments) are willing to fork over lots of dough for this type of product. Thus there is a demand by paying customers.

  9. Document *sharing* by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    PDF? Only useful if document revisions and annotations are only done by the original author!

  10. Welcome to format hell by fm6 · · Score: 3, Informative
    When you refer to "cross platform solutions" you're attacking the wrong problem. It's easy enough to set up a document server with basic version control. Most document servers have clients for every common platform. And even if yours isn't supported, there's always a Web or Java client.

    The problem is compatibility between applications. Every application has its own format -- in some cases even different versions of the same app can't share files.

    The software vendors would like you to believe that their products solve this with "import/export" filters. Bullshit. I have never, ever seen such a filter that's suitable for everyday use. Some require a lot of skill to use. But most just fail to parse this element and that. So you get data loss ranging from minor formatting errors to suprise content loss.

    The closest I can suggest to a total solution is to make everybody standardize on a small set of formats. There's a minimum of three, for plain text (and don't forget the Mac/Unix/DOS line break issue!), rich text, and graphics (possibly more than one). Easy enough to find standard formats for each these. The hard one is rich text, but not for any technical reason.

    Technically it's simple. Settle on a widely-used rich text format and forbid everything else. If you don't care about the content-formatting dichotomy, LaTeX is a good candidate -- techies can use their favorite text editors, techno-muggles can use any number of WYSIWYG tools. (Being a technical writer, I would insist on XML, but that doesn't make sense for every organization.) Problem solved, right?

    Wrong. If your organization is at all typical, you've got a lot of people who have an investment in their Word, Powerpoint, and Excel skills, and would quit if they had to start over. That's a social engineering problem, and I don't have a solution for it.

    1. Re:Welcome to format hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a stupid motherfucker.

    2. Re:Welcome to format hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, I did enjoy your mother!

    3. Re:Welcome to format hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The fact that you're even looking at this probably means you're a member of a big organisation with lots of users familiar with MS Word that won't want to change.

      MS Word's interface is quite configurable. If you remove all the visual display stuff (font, font-size, etc...) and just leave the semantic information (heading 1, heading 2, paragraph, emphasis) you can save relatively clean HTML documents. Produce a content-producers guideline that teaches them how to think about semantic documents (how to think about the logical structure of documents, and not the visual apperance)

      This solution usually goes down pretty well as people don't need to change their ways too much.

      MS Word will still produce slightly messy documents but identify any recently changed files and run HTMLtidy on them which has an option for MSHTML specifically.

    4. Re:Welcome to format hell by fm6 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      MS Word's interface is quite configurable. If you remove all the visual display stuff (font, font-size, etc...)
      So we have to castrate Word in order to save it? You're talking about stripping out most of it's functionality. People stick with products like Word and Excel because it has zillions of obscure features they know how to use. If we take that away, why are we using Word at all?
    5. Re:Welcome to format hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm not talking about stripping out most of its functionality.

      Most companies have a style guideline. They want documents to be formatted in a certain font with headings in a certain colour. "stripping out most functionality" allows a uniform style across all documents.

      Changing the font face in one document is something that shouldn't be allowed by a document management system. If you want a larger font-size you define it for all documents.

      There is never a reason for inline style without semantic information. If you work for a software company who wants source code formatted a certain way then create a word custom style for this and it will be retained in the HTML. Then set a style for the CODE tag and it's set side-wide.

      I'm only disgarding inline style information which there is never a need for. Could you please give an example where I am removing functionality?

      I am removing irregular style - not semantics, and semantics can be given a style.

    6. Re:Welcome to format hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BTW - the 'hard hitting market reality' tone of your post is really excellent. You don't say what I'm removing yet you seem to know exactly what it will do. The moderaters are falling all over you :)

    7. Re:Welcome to format hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and again, you're obviously just spouting off and ignorant what's been happening in document management in the last five years. Look, HTML began using per-document style information (the dreaded FONT tag) but they realised how unmaintainable that can be and moved to CSS. You're just some punk kid, aren't you?

  11. Zope by jfunk · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can't believe that nobody has mentioned Zope.

    I've been looking at this lately and Zope is an ideal solution.

    Zope can grok anything if you can find/write a product for it. It can also search it using ZCatalog.

    I downloaded the MSWordDocument product and it kicks ass. When you stick a Word document into the Zope database it has it's own 'type.' When you access the document it will, by default, render it in HTML (thanks to wvware) and display it, with a bar at the top with a 'download' link that retrieves the original document. What makes this even cooler is that, since Zope can extract the text, ZCatalog can give you a search interface.

    I built a simple system with search in about five minutes using the web interface and DTML tags. No lie.

    There's a similar product for PDF files and if I make one for StarOffice files, it'll be useful at the place where I work.

    To top it all of, Zope has built in versioning. You can even do diffs between arbitrary versions. It also has webdav support so that Windows users, with 'Web Folders' and Linux users, with davfs, can open and save files, with locking and everything as if they were local.

    All the little stuff is already there, too. User accounts and login handling is native, you can attach metadata to anything, and you can write scripts in Python, Perl, or PHP.

    Needless to say, I highly recommend it.

    1. Re:Zope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually ZOPE is quite natural when it comes to Document/Content Management. Especially if security needs to involved. ZOPE Documentation is getting to be quite good (several dead tree books) and several on line books. I am writing a 'skin' for the Content Mgmt Framework which will be document sharing centric.

      With CMF you can setup workflows (using your web browser) associated with content types. Since its built ontop of ZOPE you get all the ZOPE Products to boot. Only downside is you have to grok OO to understand ZOPE.

  12. wiTHinc panFora by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although wiTHinc markets panFora as just discussion forum software, we've been using it for both sharing documents and having online discussions on/around the shared documents.

    It's neat that we can deal with simple lines of text as message text, and more complex documents (pdf, excel, word, powerpoint,...) as file uploads. The discussion postings are fully threaded, so you can upload new document revisions within the same thread. We track both the comments and revisions this way. People can make public comments online or privately via panFora's email.

    panFora takes a fairly full subset of HTML formatting (tags: fonts,tables,...) in message postings. It will automatically correct HTML syntax coding errors for you, if you write your own.

    Although this is a web server application, navigation within panFora's topic/folder structure using 3 frames is just like what you are use to on the desktop for newsreaders and email. This is panFora unique strength.

    We've been using it a while and found it easy to use. More recently, they released a free version you can download. I may put the free version on a couple more servers here running Linux and Apache.

    http://www.withinc.com/home.html

  13. WebDAV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try a webdav based solution. WebDAV allows you to interact with a WebDAV enabled server to manipulate files with support for locking via extensions to HTTP 1.1

    Delta V adds version control to that.

    There are webdav enabled DMSs starting to appear (inc eg MS Sharepoint); WebDAV and its related standards will become the standard API for interacting with a DMS.

    While not yet fully featured DMS, there are good open source implementations of webDAV clients and servers; I use Slide - which works well with Tomcat 4.

    1. Re:WebDAV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WebDAV is pretty much FTP with some versioning and check-in/out functionality. It's supported in Windows 98 and up. Do a google search and you'll probably be surprised at how popular it is.

  14. Please work on your insults by fm6 · · Score: 2
    "Punk kid"? That's actually pretty flattering.

    I'd tell you how old I am if I thought you could count that high!

    1. Re:Please work on your insults by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a Simpsons quote. It wasn't really meant as an insult. But you do get what I mean, right? I'm stipping functionality that no business would want for its documents.

  15. Adobe Framemaker is a tried and true solution by t0ad · · Score: 1

    You don't mention your budget or how much effort you want to put into this but seriously consider Framemaker. It's cross platform - runs on Unix, Mac and Windows - long tried and true for documentation and manuals - Office and sales types even "get it" pretty quickly. You will find it much less cumbersome than cobbling with Pagemaker or Indesign for sure and offers you much better management controls. Has great integration with PDF, SGML, XML and more. No I don't work for Adobe - I just used to do this kind of stuff - it's a real workhorse for what you are after... Adobe's web site has lots of info.

    --
    no sig