Category Archives: November 2008

LIBER Computing socialis pro SharePoint 2007

3 Restituo

In medio July, Ego oblatum forte auctorem pro duobus capitibus Brendon Schwartz scriptor et Ranlett Matt scriptor usque venire libro, Cum sociali Computing Microsoft SharePoint 2007: Ut, et conversationis cooperationem foveant applications SharePoint in expeditione. (Puto longa trahebat certamen cum titulo; Puto parta). I jumped on the opportunity and now, tandem, totum librum fit, pervenit thesáuris in February.

Ut SharePoint maturat, publishers have begun to produce a new wave of books. This book is part of that wave. This wave builds upon the previous round of technical reference manuals explaining core features and functions and begins to describe how to use those features and functions to deliver business value in a very non-superficial way. I’m not saying that is anything superficial about reference manuals or their value. In facto, a book like this on Social Computing probably couldn’t have been written a year ago. (Litera, Posset quidem scripta, sed non puto fore paratum, majori civitatis). The new wave of books tends to assume the reader basically understands core features and instead describes how to use those core features in interesting new ways.

Sicut apertissime dicit title, this is a book about Social Computing. Social Computing is a subject ripe for discussion and exploration and indeed, the discussion is well underway among early adopters. Many companies are now quite comfortable with document libraries, content genera, quaerere, basic workflow, etc. Having implemented and mastered these bread and butter features, they are ready for the next level. This book offers insights and strategies to do that and thereby, expletandum novum et interesting quod occasiones socialis Computing Adfert mundi.

Socialis Computing est magnum et evolving subiectum et multus off rerum contegit, possidet blogs, wikis, socialis tagging, quaerere, media Interactive, mashups, "people," and other socially-oriented "stuff." SharePoint has a very strong story to tell in this arena and now, hoc tempore in Internet & SharePoint history, is the time to tell it. All things being equal between companies, those that successfully leverage Social Computing will outpace and outgrow those that do not. The train is getting ready to leave the station and you don’t want to miss it! This book is your ticket for a seat on that train 🙂

Imo linea, this is a blog entry pitching the book. It’s due out in February. Pre-order it here: Cum sociali Computing Microsoft SharePoint 2007: Ut, et conversationis cooperationem foveant applications SharePoint in expeditione.

(Pleni indicium — Si nihil velis regnum pecunia emere librum mihi, ut hoc non sit labore ad boost peculi propter meam, sed si bene illam vendit, Iuvat meam ego, quod semper plus cupit, magis, magis!)

Ut seorsum, sed ipsum secedere, Gratias ago Bob Fox for connecting me with Brendon. And naturally, Gratias ago pro Matt Brendon et accipiens casus in newbie ut ipse me auctorem et locatione in capitibus eorum valde maximus libro!

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Sequi me in Twitter ad http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Technorati Tags:

Alioqui quid limitatur Access?

3 Restituo

UPDATE 11/03/08: Be sure to read the excellent and detailed comment from Dessie Lunsford to this post.

I’ve been working on a secret tech editing project for an up-coming book and it references this blog entry by Tyler Butler on the MSDN ECM blog. This is the first time I personally read a clear definition of the meaning of Limited Access. Here’s the meat of the definition:

In SharePoint, anonymous users’ rights are determined by the Limited Access permission level. Limited Access is a special permission level that cannot be assigned to a user or group directly. The reason it exists is because if you have a library or subsite that has broken permissions inheritance, and you give a user/group access to only that library/subsite, in order to view its contents, the user/group must have some access to the root web. Otherwise the user/group will be unable to browse the library/subsite, even though they have rights there, because there are things in the root web that are needed to render the site or library. Therefore, when you give a group permissions only to a subsite or library that is breaking permissions inheritance, SharePoint will automatically give Limited Access to that group or user on the root web.

This question comes up now and then on the MSDN forums and I’ve always been curious (but not curious enough to figure it out before today :)).

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Sequi me in Twitter ad http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Technorati Tags:

Sæpe Will Georgius mihi non consentiens Big, Sed eventus ius Circa Tristia

1 Respondere

The closing thought on this otherwise dull article speaks well to problems we often face in the technical community:

"Such dreary developments, anticipated with certainty, must be borne philosophically."

This puts me in mind of one of the presentations I gave at the SharePoint Best Practices conference last month. I was describing how to get "great" business requirements and someone in the audience asked, in effect, what to do if circumstances are such that it’s impossible to get great requirements. Verbigratia, a given company’s culture places IT in front of the requirements gatherer / business analyst, preventing direct communication with end users. This is a serious impediment to obtaining great business requirements. My answer was "walk away." I’m not a big humorist, so I was surprised at how funny this was to the audience. Autem, I’m serious about this. If you can’t get good requirements, you can be certain that a dreary outcome will result. Who wants that? I’m a consultant, so it’s more realistic (although terribly painful and drastic) for me to walk away. Autem, if you’re entrenched in a company and don’t want to, or can’t, walk away, George (nam semel ) shows the way.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Sequi me in Twitter ad http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Technorati Tags:

SharePoint Designer Lorem Ipsum et Email attachiamentis — A Consummatione Devotus optandum

Aliquam responsum

Miserabile, it is not to be. We cannot send an email with attachments from a SharePoint Designer workflow using out of the box features. This wish comes up with increasing regularity on the MSDN forums.

Autem, in SharePoint suggestu, sicut cum tot rerum, does offer us a path forward. Potest creare consuetudinem actionum which we then incorporate into our workflows. Once installed, consuetudo actio spectat et sentit sicut alia actio (e.g. Notitia collecta, Stipes nuntius, etc).

Creando more actio est magnum montem scandere, autem, for End Users. This codeplex project provides this functionality: http://www.codeplex.com/SPDActivities. Pulling that down and installing it is also beyond the skills of typical End Users. Autem, quoniam suus 'valde simplex efficio is SharePoint admin, Vnde si te invenies indigens workflow evolvere facultatem, cum hoc, Fusce ut fiat opus vestrum SharePoint.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Sequi me in Twitter ad http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Technorati Tags:

Vivos Tip: Sino Obvius ut quis securitatem ad configurare Admins meum in SharePoint Site

Aliquam responsum

In signum quod Amicabiliter Computing incipiens tollet cum SharePoint, I see an increased number of My Site type questions. One common question goes something like this:

"I am an administrator and I need to be able to access every My Site. How do I do that?"

The trick here is that each My Site is its own site collection. SharePoint security is normally administered at the site collection level and this trips up many a SharePoint administrator. Normally, she already has access to configure security in the "main" site collectis et non intellexerunt quod ex hoc non sua sponte opus meum Sites.

Collectiones situ amplior collective vivunt intus continentis, which is the web application. Farm admins can can configure security at the web app level and this is how admins can grant themselves access to any site collection in the web application. This blog entry describes one of my personal experiences with web application policies. I defined a web application policy by accident: http://paulgalvin.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!1CC1EDB3DAA9B8AA!255.entry.

Web application policies can be dangerous and I suggest that they be used sparingly. If I were an admin (Deo gratias et non sum), I would create a separate AD account named something like "SharePoint Web App Administrator" and give that one account the web application security role it needs. I would not configure this kind of thing for the regular farm admin or individual site collection admins. It will tend to hide potential problems because the web app role overrides any lower level security settings.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Sequi me in Twitter ad http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Technorati Tags: ,

Vivos Tip: Utor “IsDocument:1” ut Trim Search Results

4 Restituo

Update 11/03/08: Conservus MVP Mike Walsh recte ostendit hoc esse WSS 3.0 / MOSS feature. It does not work in WSS 2.0 vel maturiorem.

Updatte 11/03/08: (Secundo update in die una!): Be sure to read the excellent comment from "nowise" et in bono alio more info xref nectunt.

Two questions came up in rapid succession this week on the MSDN forums asking a variation of this:

"When I search a keyword, folders from my document library with that keyword in their path will come out first in my search results. I don’t want that to happen. Files with that keyword are more important to me. I don’t want to see folders at all."

This is actually quite easy to do out of the box. Simply add a "IsDocument:1" to the search query and SharePoint search (both WSS and MOSS) will restrict itself to showing actual documents.

</finem>

Scribet ad mea blog.

Sequi me in Twitter ad http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Technorati Tags: