So that’d mean that departments could bring up a sharepoint server and offer whatever combination of features were appropriate for their departments, while getting the benefit of broader UW search base and centrally-provided personal sites/profiles. I’d call this the UW Sharepoint infrastructure.įor all the other functionality, I foresee hosted instances of Sharepoint which consume the shared services of the UW Sharepoint infrastructure. So getting back to the big picture, I foresee a central instance of MOSS, which primarily provides two Sharepoint features for everyone:
There is a subset of Sharepoint functionality which can be shared between Sharepoint farms/servers. Webparts actively do something, resulting in content which is displayed on the webpage. Web parts are what define most of the core cool functionality users see within Sharepoint. This is how you’d “brand” the look and feel of web pages. Master pages support styles, aka cascading style sheets (CSS). They include “content regions” and webparts where you plug in your content. These define a template for the pages which are associated with them. You can create new site templates, and you can modify a site based on a site template to be completely different from the initial default state. This defines what master page, webparts, content types are available by default initially for a new site. So this is one of the basic building blocks within Sharepoint. Reuse of a custom list item on other sites requires that you create a content type. Workflows are best targeted at content types. For example, data retention policies are best targeted at content types. A large set of the “global” functionality within Sharepoint is targeted at content types. So every “item” within every list in sharepoint has a content type, e.g. Content types are the schema component within the data architecture of Sharepoint. If you’re like me last week, you probably don’t know what they are. Most everything revolves around content types.
But for the first time, I’m starting to get a sense (dare I call it a vision?) for what the Sharepoint architecture might look like here at the UW. This is really hard to get with something like Sharepoint, where the feature set is so large. The funny thing about such a “big picture” focus is that it requires both a breadth and depth of technical detail. Like everyone else, I’m interested in learning what the buzz is about, but I also bring a focus which is very architecture-centric–the “big picture” if you will. With a bit of my time opening up with the advent of the Nebula domain migration put on hold, I’ve been really digging into understanding Sharepoint 2007.
#Uw microsoft office sharepoint torrent#
So expect a torrent of sharepoint related info here soon. But don’t worry about missed content, because I’m going to re-post all that stuff here (sorry about duplication, but I think it makes sense for the content to be re-accessible). If you aren’t subscribed, you should consider getting on that list.
Over the past week, I’ve been posting like mad to the sharepoint_tech mailman list.