Data Collaboration

Soh Hock Heng

National University of Singapore

Doug Pearson

Indiana University

Internet2 Commons Site Coordinator TrainingDecember 3, 2003National University of Singapore

2

What is Data Collaboration?

Data Collaboration Standards

Approaches to Data Collaboration

• Common Data Collaboration Tools

• Examples

3

What is data collaboration?

4

A third stream, in addition to audio and video

A shared electronic document

A view of an electronic workspace

A shared interface to a running application

Synchronous or asynchronous

A one-time, impromptu or planned engagement

A persistent, group electronic workspace

5

Some Typical Uses• Classroom (Shared whiteboards, browsers, chats; curriculum

planning, course design and repositories)

• Administration (Proposals, budgets, status reports)

• Research (Modeling/simulation, visualization, remote control)

• Medicine (Collaborative discussions, remote diagnosis)

6

Functions• Whiteboard• Chat or Instant Messenger• Shared Documents (Still

Image)• File Transfer• Shared Applications• Remote Control• Pointers• Telephone and/or VC Bridges• Video Streaming• Animation Support

Features• Chair Control• Scheduling and Timers• Agendas for Meetings, Classes• Cursor Distinction• Participant Status• Participant Lists• Security

– Authentication– Encryption

• Recording of Meeting or Collaboration

• Shared Repository, Meeting/Class Archives

7

Data Collaboration Standards

8

• T.120 Standard •Layered Services

•Common Protocol -

Network Independent

•Protocol Data Units

•P2P Communications– Standard Applications

• Still Image and annotation• Multipoint binary file

transfer• Generic application

template– Non-standard Applications

9

Approaches

10

11

Remote Data Display

12

With a projected image:

• Share a PowerPoint or other presentation

• Share display of web browsing

• Demonstrate an application

• Provide user assistance or training

• Share whiteboard sketches and text

13

Methods

• Scan converters

• Advanced proprietary solutions

Band

• In-band (on a video channel)

• Out-of-band (on an independent data channel)

14

Scan converters

–Converts a high resolution PC RGB signal to a lower resolution composite video signal

–Cheap and easy to use

–Fair to poor resolution (no small fonts)

–Uses a (the) main video window (in-band)

15

Proprietary solutions - Polycom Visual

Concert FX

–Local RGB video from PC, sound from mic to far-side video or projector/display

–Easy to use but requires high-end video conferencing appliances

–High quality, native resolution–Uses a separate window (out-of-band)

16

Proprietary solutions - Polycom SNAP!

–Transmits JPEG

snapshots of desktop or

application to a Polycom

appliance–Free and relatively easy

to use –Low resolution like scan

converter–Windows only

17

Interactive data collaboration

18

Share a desktop or a window to:• Co-browse the web

• Jointly work on whiteboard diagrams

• Jointly update a document

Share a running application to:• Jointly steer its operation

• Provide support or training on its use

• Troubleshoot problems

• Use valuable, limited resources

Define a meeting space

19

• Overview of Tools (Loose Categories)Shared Browsers

SurfNChatZofXPowerCallWebAnytimeCuSeeMe

JAVA/JavascriptHabaneroMeetingPlacemDeskBrainsharkiMeetRaindance

Peer to Peer (P2P)Groovejxta

Remote Control VNCTimbuktuWave3 Session

HybridsThinAnywhereWebWisdomHelpMeetingeMeetingHorizonLiveMeetingOne

Other VRVSPlacewareInSORS IG Presenter

Whiteboards/Chat

Virtual OfficesWebOffice

WebEx

InfoWorkspace

e/pop

T.120NetMeeting

RadVision DCS

SGIMeeting

Lotus Sametime

SunForum

MeetingOne

20

T.120 Solutions

21

T.120 Issues+Does file transfer and still image well

+Fairly widespread

+Inexpensive or Free

– Implementation Compliance

–Lack of industry interest in further development

–No support for Video or Animation

–Scalability

22

Polycom WebOffice

23

ThinAnywhere

24

ThinAnywhere - Sever Login Panel

Can setscreen size

High, lowor medium

Session id forcollaboration

25

ThinAnywhere - Windows Server Example

Connect toWindows 2000

Machinelconnect/LANCEconnection made

26

ThinAnywhere

Session id forcollaboration

27

ThinAnywhere

Try OpenDXexample

Run asample

Pick theisosurface

28

ThinAnywhere

29

ThinAnywhere Summary

+Very flexible

+Moderately priced

+Application sharing

+Server sharing

–Server system administration required

–User/panel setup required

30

Wave3 Session Application Sharing

31

Wave3 Session Application Sharing

32

Wave3 Session Application Sharing

33

Wave3 Session Media Sharing

34

Wave3 Session Media Sharing

35

Wave3 Session Sharing Summary+Attached to new SIP videoconferencing client

+Includes clients for both PC and MAC

+Inexpensive (but not free)

+Handles multimedia sharing

• Application/desktop sharing based on VNC

• Current version only does desktop sharing for Mac

36

Persistent virtual workspaces

37

With remote collaborators:

• Use some of the capabilities of interactive data

collaboration, plus:

• Collaborate over time on an project or activity and

maintain the work record: documents, discussion,

digital objects, notes, outlines, etc. in a virtual

workspace.

38

Groove

39

Groove Features

–Calendar

–Contacts

–Discussion forum

–Document review

–File sharing

–Forms

–Notepad

–Outliner

–Images

–Project management

–Sketchpad

–Shared web browser

–Custom tools

40

41

42

43

Groove Summary

+Persistent Space

–Serious training required

–Serious commitment required (your work in

workspace, availability, etc.)

–Lacks full application sharing capabilities

–Accidental deletions

44

Final Comments

45

• Bandwidth requirements

Browser based and centralized tools are influenced more

by network latency and virus problems/DoS attacks.

• Sustained workflow

Newer tools are stressing persistent environments rather

than separate session use.

• Availability

Commercial tool pricing for general (mass) use is

probably an obstacle. Project pricing probably

reasonable.

46

• Methodology

While many use open standards for individual

elements, overall architectures and interfaces

tend to be unique or even proprietary.

• Ease of use

Tools are not always intuitive.

Documentation is sparse or scattered.

47

Mary Trauner Georgia Tech

mary.trauner@oit.gatech.edu