Talk:Content Management Interoperability Services

Benefits

This whole section looks like a collection of marketing hype? For instance, what in CMIS is Web 2.0? Most of what's being said applies to any protocol for content management. I'd propose to remove it, or rewrite it in a way so that it becomes clear what is special about CMIS as opposed to other protocols.

I agree with the marketing hype, especially considering that a few (company) names are missing who actually made this happen! (M) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.134.130 (talk) 10:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

what is "on the glass"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.171.177.182 (talk) 22:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree and have tagged the offending section accordingly. -- samj _in^out 15:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Offending parts removed. Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:56, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Implementations

There is a list of implementations that should be incorporated. -- samj _in^out 15:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm hesitant to edit the article directly, since I am an IBM employee. But the current list of implementations does not include IBM FileNet (http://www-01.ibm.com/common/ssi/ShowDoc.jsp?docURL=/common/ssi/rep_ca/8/897/ENUS210-408/index.html&breadCrum=DET001PT022&url=buttonpressed=DET002PT005&specific_index=DET001PEF502&DET015PGL002=DET001PEF011&submit.x=7&submit.y=8&lang=en_US). How can we ensure the list is complete? Jakelevirne (talk) 18:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Has been added, thanks! Nicolas1981 (talk) 09:50, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

The implementations list is confusing: the green/yes/red/no boxes are used for 2 distinct purposes. The supported functionality is expected, but the Open Source status is made strangely prominent. Additionally, the Open Source column is lacking citations - I can't find evidence the the SharePoint implementation is Open Source (as the list claims). I would suggest some combination of 1) Removing the "Open Source" column, 2) Removing the red/green color of the column 3) Changing it from a vague yes/no to the particular license, 4) Adding citations for the licensing. 67.201.57.5 (talk) 16:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The opensource libraries for .NET are basically useless: One never released a piece of code, the other has a last release in 2013... I guess they should both be removedSimonech (talk) 08:08, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

What is it? How does it work?

The article is extremely thin on operational details. e.g. How does it work?Jgb2 (talk) 10:44, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. I will try to add operational details. Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Unknown

Can someone who knows more about these products please allocate each of these products into one, and only one, of the above lists (client or server)?

Software	Language	Open source
Constellio	Java	Yes
ECM Mobile	Java	Yes
enprovia Mobile Enabler 2.0	Java	No
Exstream Software	Java	No

Jojalozzo 03:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Rewrite tag

I feel that the "rewrite" tag is a bit too extreme, the article does not need to be re-written from scratch even though it certainly needs to be improved. The tables are probably one of the main reasons it looks unmature. In the servers table, do we really need the "Capability support" column? I think it is too technical... I boldly remove it, please let me know if you feel it is better to have the column back. Also, could we enrich the infobox? With creation date and current version for instance. Finally, a diagram showing where CMIS can sit in these 3 use cases would be great. Nicolas1981 (talk) 06:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I was confused by the sudden absence of the "Capability support" column, since that was explicitely what I wanted to consult. Perhaps that info can be put back but presented more clearly, something different from having all capabilities in a single table cell? Matijs van Zuijlen (talk) 22:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

How about writing capabilities in a second table, with servers in rows and capabilities in columns? Anyone please go ahead and give it a try :-) Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Matijs - removing that column made a bunch of useful (and difficult to obtain!) information disappear. Nicolas1981 can you explain why you removed it instead of either moving it into a separate table, or leaving it there for someone else to do? As it stands, this valuable information has effectively disappeared, to the detriment of the article.

Here is the last version with the capabilities column. The article was in real danger of being deleted for its bad quality, so it was necessary to take action. In the eye of the average Wikipedia admin, this dump of technical codes is a valid reason for suppression. I am OK with re-inserting it as a second table with a short human-readable description of what each key means. Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:53, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Moved from article: xCMIS notes

Moved from the server table's "Notes" column, because does not belong there, and needs to be wikified (ex:superlatives):

The xCMIS project, initially contributed to the Open Source community by eXo, is an implementation of the full stack of Java-based CMIS services. xCMIS also include the client side frameworks for integrating content from different enterprise repositories according to the CMIS standard.

xCMIS provides an out-of-the-box ability to expose an eXo JCR repository, and can be used in conjunction with CMIS gadgets using GWT based client side framework (coming soon to Open Source). Both can be easily integrated to the GateIn portal.

xCMIS supports all the features specified in the CMIS core definition as well as both REST AtomPub and Web Services (SOAP/WSDL) protocol bindings. In addition to architecture supposed to provide an ability to a plug any third party content repository thanks to Storage Provider Interface layer.

So, the idea of the project is to make as simple as possible joining Enterprise Content repositories making all of them CMIS-able and expose them to language-independent CMIS clients using the most convenient protocol. Read more about CMIS in real-life here .

xCMIS project is Packaged as J2EE Web archive ( WAR ) as well as prepared "download and go" Tomcat bundle

Nicolas1981 (talk) 06:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Columns of the clients table

I don't think the "technology" column of the clients table is really relevant... It is relevant in the "libraries" tables, but not in the "applications" table. For end-users, knowing whether the app use is written in C or C++ does not really matter that much, and it makes the table more complex. How about removing this column?

Instead, I feel the applications table could use a column describing the end-user UI. How to describe it? For instance: Android, Windows, web. The case of Drupal is more complex, it can show data from a CMIS server via the web, but also via FTP/etc... Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

What infobox?

I feel that "Infobox file format" is not the most appropriate, even tough it is the one used by AtomPub. How about Template:Infobox_networking_protocol or another most appropriate one? Nicolas1981 (talk) 03:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Capture solutions

Should I make a new section on the main page for Capture products that can also insert documents in DMS systems using CMIS? Or does the community think that this is not part of this entry ? The main distinction of capture products with clients is that they specifically add documents and metadata to e.g. a DMS, but not always get documents from these systems. Full disclosure : I work as an IT Professional in this field. IvarSnaaijer (talk) 14:29, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi IvarSnaaijer! Capture products are CMIS clients, so adding such products to the Clients sections is perfectly appropriate :-) Cheers! Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:38, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Clarification needed

This is cited as a benefit of CMIS: "Decouples web service and content. So CMIS can be used to access a historic document repository."

Any idea what the author meant? Nicolas1981 (talk) 10:29, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Prototype for a new table showing server capabilities

Hi all! I have been experimenting with different ways to show server capabilities. Server capabilities are highly technical, but very informative for people familiar with CMIS.

What do you think about the prototype below?

Server	ACL	AllVersionsSearchable	Changes
Alfresco	manage	No	objectidsonly	objectidsonly
Chemistry InMemory Server	none	No	properties
EMC Documentum	manage	Yes	none

Cheers! Nicolas1981 (talk) 06:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Everybody? It has been a week, can I boldly implement this idea? Nicolas1981 (talk) 08:32, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

References

Day Software

Day Software has been bought by Adobe 6 years ago, and the most recent version of the product (called Adobe Experience Manager) does not seem to support CMIS anymore, as far as I can tell. Should we keep the Day Software line anyway, for historical purposes? Syced (talk) 09:27, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Content Management Interoperability Services. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.aiim.org/ResourceCenter/Archive/Article.aspx?ID=31483
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081228105956/http://www.aiim.org/standards/article.aspx?ID=29284 to http://www.aiim.org/Standards/article.aspx?ID=29284
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.aiim.org/ResourceCenter/Archive/Article.aspx?ID=30301
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.fabasoft.com/web/guest/company/downloads/documentation
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120311093947/http://documentation.magnolia-cms.com/modules/cmis.html to http://documentation.magnolia-cms.com/modules/cmis.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)