Browse Tag by review

Coming soon with BlueSpice 3 – a look at the road map

640px-Traffic_seen_from_top_of_Arc_de_Triomphe
BrokenSphere, Street traffic in the Place de l’Étoile as seen from the top of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, France, GFDL, CC-BY-SA-3.0 or CC BY-SA 2.5-2.0-1.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

I can hardly believe it: the current version of BlueSpice, BlueSpice 2, will be four years old this year. It feels like just a few months ago that we announced Version 2. Anyway, it is now time to start thinking about a new version and to continue writing the road map.

At Hallo Welt! we have spent the last months collecting ideas, and checking and weighting requirements.

At our yearly strategy meeting, Markus Glaser presented his technical plan. So now it is official that we will publish a new BlueSpice Version 3 in the first quarter of 2018. The road map for our new MediaWiki distribution contains essential innovations and improvements we have wanted for a long time. BlueSpice 3 will achieve a new level of stability and flexibility. Continue Reading

Quality assurance and review with BlueSpice for MediaWiki – [teamwork]

Organize reviews in a team
Organize reviews in a team

Sometimes is enough to assign a contact person to a wiki article. You can realize that with the “responsible editors” function in BlueSpice. In order to manage the edits and reviews of articles, images and files in a team, we developed the package Teamwork that is included in the subscription BlueSpice pro.

The quality assurance in a wiki does not only apply to one responsible editor, but is a coordinated interaction between several editors.
Review periods and workflows, in which editors shall act, can be defined.

The underlying system of if-then relations is complex but has the advantage to be adjusted according to the company’s needs.

Let´s take the following standard process for our example: there is a change in an article that has to be approved, rejected or delegated by several editors of various departments. We assume that in the end of the reviewing-workflow there has to be a final approval to assign the article with the official status “accepted and therefore is considered valid.  Let´s go through the following example to show you how this standard procedure works: Continue Reading