Web Advisory Meeting Committee (WAC)

Wednesday, December 10

Present:

Allan Bell, Andrew Smith, Clint MacDonald, Eva Grabinski, Geoff McBoyle, Guillermo Fuentes, Kelley Teahen, Karen Jack, Kevin Paxman, Marlon Griffith, Megan McDermott, Michelle Douglas-Mills, Paul Snyder (chair), Pat Lafranier, Sarah Forgrave, Terry Stewart, Tobi Day-Hamilton

Regrets:

David Bean, Isaac Morland, Mary Lynn Benninger, Sean Van Koughnett, Tammy Marcinko, Mary Jane Jennings

1. Opening remarks

  • Approval of the agenda
  • Approval of [[MeetingMinutes20081020][minutes of November 19th meeting]]
  • Information Items and followup from previous meeting
  • * Privacy Statement: * Karen - the [[https://uwaterloo.ca/privacy][University of Waterloo Privacy Statement]] has been updated to include a section on Web Analytics. * Suggestion (approved) that the term Google Analytics be used in place of Web Analytics. * Google Analytics users should replace the uwaterloo URL in the footer with the text "privacy statement". * discussion of whether or not we should we announce it in the Daily Bulletin. Allan – we should probably hold off until the statement includes awstats and a statement about authentication. * consensus that we (Pat) will email list of web maintainers to advise than of the changes, particularly if they are using Google Analytics. * we’ll need to change the template.

2. IT review questions

- Geoff opened the discussion and asked for input on web services that could be improved. The following comments were received:

  • the University culture challenges IT support with the variety of programs used on campus.
  • centralizing services and resources would only work if support was diversified across campus.
  • communication and bringing people together is key to the process. A duplication of efforts can be avoided if the community communicates its needs before going out and doing it on their own as is happening now.
  • would like to see a central firewall, internal IP structure (not public), etc.
  • anything central needs to be well documented.
  • communication between groups is needed to solve current issues.
  • comment that the current XHEIR packaging that is offered is not usable for some servers.
  • services from some groups are coordinated with Information Systems and Technology (IST) (anti-virus, backup services) and this worked well for them. Some services are better if they are supported internally in the department.
  • concern that there are worries that the web will be controlled by one group, reducing flexibility.
  • noted that communication and consultation as well as shared governance were essential but that in the end we must emphasize that compliance is not optional.
  • concern that much effort has been put forth in selecting a Content Management System (CMS); in the end would it get the support from University Committee on Information Systems and Technology (UCIST)?
  • comment that it may come down to UCIST saying that they'll only make the deal if there is buy-in across campus.
  • there would need to be a mandate from the top. He went on to say that Faculty don't have a place at the top and that what the University needs are leaders with industrial expertise.
  • commented that leaders need an institutional perspective.
  • noted that we hadn't mentioned any IT services that worked well. The campus wireless is a service that works very well. Also noted that email hasn't worked so well with backlogs and messages being received well after they should have arrived.
  • Comment that our webmail client needs to be replaced with something better (Outlook Web App (OWA) being a good example of something better).
  • comment that some groups need to be able to communicate with students quickly. Also commented that students not using their uwaterloo email accounts and not knowing about UWdir forwarding email to outside services like yahoo or Gmail.
  • question on thoughts of introducing a campus wide buying program for computers, etc. Noted that we do have an arrangement with Lenovo that others can take advantage of.
  • there appears to be a huge difference in funding for web operations (equipment/staff) between various areas on campus and it shows in the quality and uniqueness of the web sites.
  • comment that resources are uneven as are attitudes toward how much money and effort should be put into web media.
  • another issue with areas being so varied in that sometimes the training offered doesn't apply to them.
  • much agreement that the amount of variety across campus is a big problem when it comes to support.
  • final comment that enforcement probably wouldn’t work, it's better to show the benefits and hope that people buy in.

Geoff and Alan thanked everyone for the comments and invited more input via email.

3. Web Content Management Systems

Recommendation to UCIST Dec.19th

4. Needs assessment

Megan - 4 focus groups and a survey. The group is now analyzing the data (people like using Contribute and Dreamweaver, more people use Dreamweaver than was expected, there is hesitation to change – people don’t see the benefits, there are many different needs). The next step is to decide what is necessary for the technical assessment committee to test.

Terry - Survey to system administrators (only 15 replies so far – so there is heavy bias to few groups). Results will be posted on this TWIKI. There seems to be lots of experience with CMS systems and overall support for a secure server with LDAP authentication.

5. Technical assessment

Terry – Friday December 5, Red Dot and Drupal. Red Dot gave a good presentation and spent 2 hrs with the group, they offer a “live” server with push/pull to other servers. Friday Dec.12, Hannon-Hill will present a Cascade server demo at 1:00pm in Math and Computer building (MC) 2009. At their Dec.11th meeting the group will be discussing their recommendation to UCIST.

-- Heather Wey - 11 Dec 2008