Knowledge Management Toolkit

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Knowledge Management Toolkit KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT TOOLKIT This Knowledge Management Toolkit has been created by the SDC Knowledge and Learning Processes Division in cooperation with Agridea Lindau. This toolkit is available in English only. Short versions in the form of a Vademecum are available in English, German, French, and Spanish. All texts are also available on the Internet www.daretoshare.ch For further information, please contact one of the members of the Department Knowledge and Learning Processes, [email protected] Published by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Federal of Foreign Affairs (FFA) www.deza.admin.ch Available from SDC Knowledge and Learning Processes Division Freiburgstrasse 130 CH-3003 Berne E-mail: [email protected] Tel. +4131 322 35 79 Fax +4131 324 13 47 Editors SDC, Knowledge and Learning Processes Division, 3003 Bern Ernst Bolliger, Agridea, 8315 Lindau Layout Annemarie Weishaupt, Nicole Moser (Cover) AGRIDEA, 8315 Lindau Photos Karina Muench, 8000 Zurich Copyright SDC 2009 ❑ We know that well proven ❑ methods and knowledge are With many other organisa- ➜ We want to available tions, we are connected and sum up the ➜ As publisher maintain a constructive and ❑ results and the We do have a lot of freedom of the present trusting relationship in organising our work experience of toolkit, the ❑ Reviews, evaluations and our activities, ❑ Only rarely (if ever) do we Knowledge studies help us to under- and to present ask our colleagues about and Learn- stand our activities and their them in a form their experience ing Processes effects that is easy to Division of ❑ We allow ourselves little time ❑ understand SDC supports However, we ourselves do for reading and for not always become aware of ➜ We want our sharing our experience the sharing of knowledge and what in fact we have learnt products to be ❑ We take little time to de- skills ❑ Still we know that sharing available to scribe our own work requires a real interest in the our partner realistically, and to look at it experience of other people organisations critically Our organisation is a Our organisation is learning organisation interconnected Introductory remarks to the toolkit «Sharing Knowledge and Learning» SDC Bern, July 2009 Jörg Frieden, Manuel Flury Our organisation is Our organisation strives closely related to practice for effectiveness ➜ Collaborators ❑ Obtaining the desired effect of SDC use is the best argument for get- ➜ tried and true ting the support necessary This toolkit ❑ A variety of methods exists, methods them- for our activities makes avail- able the meth- and they are easy to apply selves and re- ❑ By making use of know- ods pro ven ❑ We constantly use new flect on them ledge proven in practice, we in practice, methods ➜ will be effective By applying the and thus sup- ❑ Sometimes we become tired methods, we ❑ However, in practice our ports efficient of using new methods and experience the les sons learnt and our and effective keep away from innovations added value successful experience are sharing of they produce not sufficiently taken into knowledge for our practical account when planning fu- work ture activities Contents Contents After Action Review .........................................................................................1 Balanced Scorecard ....................................................................................... 5 Brainstorming ................................................................................................9 Briefing and Debriefing ................................................................................ 15 Collegial Coaching ......................................................................................19 Community of Practice (CoP) ........................................................................ 23 Exit Interviews .............................................................................................. 29 Experience Capitalization ............................................................................. 33 Facilitation ...................................................................................................41 Good Practice ..............................................................................................47 Knowledge Fair ............................................................................................53 Knowledge Map........................................................................................... 57 Knowledge Networks ................................................................................... 63 Lessons Learnt ............................................................................................ 67 Mentoring ................................................................................................... 71 Open Space ................................................................................................ 79 Peer Assist / Peer Review ...............................................................................85 Storytelling .................................................................................................. 91 SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) .................................. 97 Visualisation .............................................................................................. 101 World Café ................................................................................................107 Yellow Pages ..............................................................................................113 Methods for Knowledge Management and their Specific Suitability ...............117 SDC Knowledge Management Toolkit After Action Review After Action Review So as not to regret, but to look back, understand and go on. What are after action reviews? An after action review (AAR) is a discussion of a project or an activity that enables the individuals involved to learn for themselves what happens, why it happened, what went well, what needs improvement and what lessons can be learned from the experience. The spirit of an AAR is one of openness and learning – it is not about problem fixing or allocating blame. Lessons learned are not only tacitly shared on the spot by the individuals involved, but can be explicitly documented and shared with a wider audience. After action reviews were originally developed and are extensively used by the US Army. What are the benefits? What makes after action reviews so powerful is that they can be applied across a wide spectrum of activities, from two individuals conducting a five minute AAR at the end of a short meeting to a day-long AAR held by a project team at the end of a large project. Activities suitable for AARs simply need to have a beginning and an end, an identifiable purpose and some basis on which performance can be assessed. Other than that, there are few limits. Some examples of when to use an AAR are: when you have introduced a new set of procedures or ways of working; after a busy winter season in which capacity was stretched; following the introduction of a new computer system; after a major training activity; after a shift handover; following a piece of research or a clinical trial; after performing surgery; etc. AARs are excellent for making tacit knowledge explicit during the life of a project or activity and thus allowing you to capture it. Learning can be captured before a team disbands, or before people forget what happened and move on to something else. Despite the name (‘after ac- tion’), they do not have to be performed at the end of a project or activity. Rather, they can be performed after each identifiable event within a project or major activity, thus becoming a live learning process in which lessons learned can be immediately applied. In fact this is where AARs can add the greatest value. AARs provide insights into exactly what contributes to the strengths and weaknesses of a project or activity, including the performance of each individual involved, of the project leader, the team as a whole, and the various processes involved. SDC Knowledge Management Toolkit 1 After Action Review AARs are also a useful tool for developing your employees, which they do by providing con- structive, directly actionable feedback in a non-threatening way because they are not linked to employee assessment. Similarly, they give people an opportunity to share their views and ideas and to be heard. How do I go about it? AARs can be grouped into three types: formal, informal and personal. Although the funda- mental approach involved in each is essentially the same, there is some variation in how they are conducted. Formal AARs tend to be conducted at the end of a major project or event (learning after do- ing). They require some preparation and planning, but are not difficult as they take the form of a simple meeting. This meeting may take place over a couple of hours or a couple of days, depending on the scale of the project. Steps and tips for successful formal AARs include: 1. Call the meeting as soon as possible and invite the right people AARs should be conducted as soon as possible after the event. The reasons are simple: memories are fresh, participants are available and where appropriate, learning can be applied immediately. As well as the project manager and the key members of the project, it may be useful to invite the project client or sponsor and also members of any project teams who are about to embark on a similar project. However, be aware that the presence of external people may inhibit some team members.
Recommended publications
  • Ts 124 623 V9.3.0 (2011-10)
    ETSI TS 124 623 V9.3.0 (2011-10) Technical Specification Digital cellular telecommunications system (Phase 2+); Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS); LTE; Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) over the Ut interface for Manipulating Supplementary Services (3GPP TS 24.623 version 9.3.0 Release 9) 3GPP TS 24.623 version 9.3.0 Release 9 1 ETSI TS 124 623 V9.3.0 (2011-10) Reference RTS/TSGC-0124623v930 Keywords GSM,LTE,UMTS ETSI 650 Route des Lucioles F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16 Siret N° 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C Association à but non lucratif enregistrée à la Sous-Préfecture de Grasse (06) N° 7803/88 Important notice Individual copies of the present document can be downloaded from: http://www.etsi.org The present document may be made available in more than one electronic version or in print. In any case of existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions, the reference version is the Portable Document Format (PDF). In case of dispute, the reference shall be the printing on ETSI printers of the PDF version kept on a specific network drive within ETSI Secretariat. Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status. Information on the current status of this and other ETSI documents is available at http://portal.etsi.org/tb/status/status.asp If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services: http://portal.etsi.org/chaircor/ETSI_support.asp Copyright Notification No part may be reproduced except as authorized by written permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Extraction for Hybrid Question Answering
    KNOWLEDGEEXTRACTIONFORHYBRID QUESTIONANSWERING Von der Fakultät für Mathematik und Informatik der Universität Leipzig angenommene DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor rerum naturalium (Dr. rer. nat.) im Fachgebiet Informatik vorgelegt von Ricardo Usbeck, M.Sc. geboren am 01.04.1988 in Halle (Saale), Deutschland Die Annahme der Dissertation wurde empfohlen von: 1. Professor Dr. Klaus-Peter Fähnrich (Leipzig) 2. Professor Dr. Philipp Cimiano (Bielefeld) Die Verleihung des akademischen Grades erfolgt mit Bestehen der Verteidigung am 17. Mai 2017 mit dem Gesamtprädikat magna cum laude. Leipzig, den 17. Mai 2017 bibliographic data title: Knowledge Extraction for Hybrid Question Answering author: Ricardo Usbeck statistical information: 10 chapters, 169 pages, 28 figures, 32 tables, 8 listings, 5 algorithms, 178 literature references, 1 appendix part supervisors: Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Klaus-Peter Fähnrich Dr. Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo institution: Leipzig University, Faculty for Mathematics and Computer Science time frame: January 2013 - March 2016 ABSTRACT Over the last decades, several billion Web pages have been made available on the Web. The growing amount of Web data provides the world’s largest collection of knowledge.1 Most of this full-text data like blogs, news or encyclopaedic informa- tion is textual in nature. However, the increasing amount of structured respectively semantic data2 available on the Web fosters new search paradigms. These novel paradigms ease the development of natural language interfaces which enable end- users to easily access and benefit from large amounts of data without the need to understand the underlying structures or algorithms. Building a natural language Question Answering (QA) system over heteroge- neous, Web-based knowledge sources requires various building blocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Web Development Frameworks for Delphi
    Evaluating Web Development Frameworks for Delphi Updates, links, and more embt.co/WebDev2019 #DelphiWebDev Disclaimer ❏ This content is mostly focused on 3rd party frameworks and libraries ❏ While a lot of time was spent researching, some of the information may be outdated or otherwise incorrect through an error during research ❏ Links are provided to the sources, and you are encouraged to double check all information and seek clarification ❏ Any exclusion is just an oversight or a result of limited time and space and was not an intentional indication of quality or suitability ❏ This information presented here is not intended to indicate superiority or inferiority of one library over another for any use cases ❏ Please consider this a good faith effort to represent these libraries and frameworks impartially and accurately ❏ I will reach out to the projects, companies, and developers to seek corrections and additional information. ❏ Erratas and updates will be published at embt.co/WebDev2019 Thanks! Delphi and FireMonkey: Winning Combination for Cross- Platform Development → Single Codebase → Easy-to-tailor platform specific UIs → One programming language to learn and support What about Web Apps? Delphi’s incredible productivity for building amazing apps also extends to the web! https://blog.hootsuite.com/simon-kemp-social-media/ https://blog.hootsuite.com/simon-kemp-social-media/ People spend a daily average of 6 hours & 42 minutes using the internet https://blog.hootsuite.com/simon-kemp-social-media/ ❏Different kinds of web development
    [Show full text]
  • Visio-MIDD Sharepoint Architecture Design Sample.Vsd
    College Colleagues Remote Employees Internal Users Farm Administrators Customers Trustees Work from Home Web Services Faculty Parents Alumni Affiliated Institutions Systems & Network Services Current Students Prospective Students External Professors Schools Abroad Staff Local Community Prospective Students Global Community Extranet Remotenet Intranet Adminet Internet Authentication = NTLM (Integrated Windows) Authentication = forms authentication using ISA Server 2006 SSO Authentication = Integrated Windows (Kerberos or NTLM) Authentication = Integrated Windows (Kerberos or NTLM) Authentication = Anonymous —or— Forms with an LDAP provider Application Pool 1 Application Pool 7 Application Pool 2 Application Pool 3 Application Pool 8 Web application: Web application: Central Administration Site Central Administration Site Web application: Web application: Web application: Shared Services Shared Services Shared Services Administration Site—Default Administration Site— Administration Site—Default PartnerWeb Application Pool 4 Application Pool 5 Application Pool 6 Application Pool 9 Web application: Intranet Applications Web application: My Sites Web application: Team Sites Web application: Intraweb Web application: Internet Site http://team <varies> http://my http://web http://www Team1 Team2 Team3 Delivered http://my/personal/<user> Handbook HR Policies Library Authoring Site Staging Site Production Site Content Collection Collection Collection HR Project from Events Management Banner, Registration Segue, etc Admissions Academics Athletics Database settings: Target size per database = TBD Database settings: Database settings: Database settings: Site size limits per site = TBD Target size per database = TBD Content Deployment Site level warning = 0 Site level warning = 0 Content Deployment Maximum number of sites = flexible Storage quota per site = TBD Maximum number of sites = 1 (one site collection per database). Maximum number of sites = 1 (one site collection per database).
    [Show full text]
  • D 5.2.2 Semantic Annotation 2
    SEMANTIC ANNOTATION 2 MARCH 2017 DELIVERABLE Project Acronym: SDI4Apps Grant Agreement number: 621129 Project Full Title: Uptake of Open Geographic Information Through Innovative Services Based on Linked Data D5.2.2 SEMANTIC ANNOTATION 2 Revision no. 03 Authors: Otakar Čerba (University of West Bohemia) Project co-funded by the European Commission within the ICT Policy Support Programme Dissemination Level P Public X C Confidential, only for members of the consortium and the Commission Services D5.2.2 Semantic Annotation 2 REVISION HISTORY Revision Date Author Organisation Description 01 07/03/2016 Otakar Čerba UWB Initial draft 02 29/03/2016 Martin Tuchyna, SAZP/CCSS Internal review Karel Charvát 03 30/03/2016 Otakar Čerba UWB Final version Statement of originality: This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise. Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made through appropriate citation, quotation or both. Disclaimer: Views expressed in this document are those of the individuals, partners or the consortium and do not represent the opinion of the Community. Page 3 of 15 © SDI4Apps Consortium 2017 D5.2.2 Semantic Annotation 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Revision History ................................................................................................................. 3 Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. 4 List of Figures ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Smart Points of Interest
    Applications of Smart Points Of Interest Otakar Čerba University of West Bohemia, Plzeň, Czech Republic Outline I About Smart Points of Interest (SPOI) I Examples of applications – map client I Future steps of SPOI development Motivation – Why did we start to develop SPOI 1. Request for open data for tourism, including promotion of services or regions → data focused on interesting places or features (points of interest) 2. Need to interconnect this data with existing data, but also non-structured information (photos, maps, text documents, records. ) → Linked Data approach 3. Demand on seamless data (without state borders) → one global dataset enabling any type of data querying (GeoSPARQL) 4. Low costs on data production and management → data from various existing resources, but published in the uniform data model and with use standards 5. Possibility of an attractive visualization (maps), integration to external application and simple editing → support by independent simple tools based on standards Smart Points of Interest (SPOI) I ~27 000 000 points published as 5* Linked Open Data I Data access I Map client (within editing) I SPARQL endpoint (results exported to JSON, CSV, RDF. ) I Web page: gis.zcu.cz/spoi I SPOI description I Links to map client and SPARQL endpoint I Data model, harmonization scheme, list of changes, metadata DOAP a VoID SPOI Populating I 49 external data resources I Global datasets – OpenStreetMap, Natural Earth, GeoNames.org I Local data from Citadel on the Move project I Local data – small regions from Italy, Belgium,
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Knowledge Management Systems On
    THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public CHILD POLICY service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NATIONAL SECURITY The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research POPULATION AND AGING organization providing objective analysis and effective PUBLIC SAFETY solutions that address the challenges facing the public SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore Pardee RAND Graduate School View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the Pardee RAND Graduate School (PRGS) dissertation series. PRGS dissertations are produced by graduate fellows of the Pardee RAND Graduate School, the world’s leading producer of Ph.D.’s in policy analysis. The dissertation has been supervised, reviewed, and approved by the graduate fellow’s faculty committee. The Effect of Knowledge Management Systems on Organizational Performance Do Soldier and Unit Counterinsurgency Knowledge and Performance Improve Following “Push” or “Adaptive-Push” Training? S.
    [Show full text]
  • Collaborative Writing with Web 2.0 Technologies: Education Students’ Perceptions
    Journal of Information Technology Education: Volume 10, 2011 Innovations in Practice Collaborative Writing with Web 2.0 Technologies: Education Students’ Perceptions Cornelia Brodahl, Said Hadjerrouit, and Nils Kristian Hansen University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Executive Summary Web 2.0 technologies are becoming popular in teaching and learning environments. Among them several online collaborative writing tools, like wikis and blogs, have been integrated into educa- tional settings. Research has been carried out on a wide range of subjects related to wikis, while other, comparable tools like Google Docs and EtherPad remain largely unexplored in the litera- ture. This work presents a case study investigating education students’ perceptions of collabora- tive writing using Google Docs and EtherPad. Both tools provide opportunity for multiple users to work on the same document simultaneously, have a separate space for written metacommuni- cation, and are promoted by software designers to be fairly intuitive to adopt without prior train- ing. The work investigates if perceptions depend on factors such as gender, age, digital compe- tence, interest in digital tools, educational settings, and choice of writing tool, and examines if the tools are easy to use and effective in group work. This paper focuses on quantitative results of survey questionnaires. Further qualitative analysis will be presented in a later paper. The theoretical framework is drawn from two learning theories, the social-constructivist learning theory and the community of practice, and their relationships to collaborative tools. Related re- search literature is characterized by a number of issues: positive elements of use, advantages of using Web 2.0 technologies, critical issues regarding the pedagogical value of Web 2.0, and the role of the teacher in using these technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Framework Supporting Development of Ontology-Based Web Applications
    University of New Orleans ScholarWorks@UNO University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations Dissertations and Theses 12-17-2010 A Framework Supporting Development of Ontology-Based Web Applications Shireesha Tankashala University of New Orleans Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td Recommended Citation Tankashala, Shireesha, "A Framework Supporting Development of Ontology-Based Web Applications" (2010). University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations. 103. https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/103 This Thesis-Restricted is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis-Restricted in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. This Thesis-Restricted has been accepted for inclusion in University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Framework Supporting Development of Ontology-Based Web Applications A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of New Orleans in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Computer Science by Shireesha M Tankashala G.Narayanamma Institute of Technology, India, 2006 December 2010 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my major professor Dr. Shengru Tu for his belief and substantial support throughout my work.
    [Show full text]
  • Voidext: Vocabulary and Patterns for Enhancing Interoperable Datasets with Virtual Links
    VoIDext: Vocabulary and Patterns for Enhancing Interoperable Datasets with Virtual Links Tarcisio M. de Farias1;2( ), Kurt Stockinger4, and Christophe Dessimoz1;2;3 1 SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland 2 University of Lausanne, Switzerland 3 University College London, UK 4 Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland [email protected] Abstract. Semantic heterogeneity remains a problem when interoper- ating with data from sources of different scopes and knowledge domains. Causes for this challenge are context-specific requirements (i.e. no \one model fits all"), different data modelling decisions, domain-specific pur- poses, and technical constraints. Moreover, even if the problem of se- mantic heterogeneity among different RDF publishers and knowledge domains is solved, querying and accessing the data of distributed RDF datasets on the Web is not straightforward. This is because of the com- plex and fastidious process needed to understand how these datasets can be related or linked, and consequently, queried. To address this issue, we propose to extend the existing Vocabulary of Interlinked Datasets (VoID) by introducing new terms such as the Virtual Link Set concept and data model patterns. A virtual link is a connection between re- sources such as literals and IRIs (Internationalized Resource Identifier) with some commonality where each of these resources is from a differ- ent RDF dataset. The links are required in order to understand how to semantically relate datasets. In addition, we describe several benefits of using virtual links to improve interoperability between heterogenous and independent datasets. Finally, we exemplify and apply our approach to multiple world-wide used RDF datasets.
    [Show full text]
  • Raising Risk Awareness on the Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies in Decision Making Processes
    Future Internet 2012, 4, 700-718; doi:10.3390/fi4030700 OPEN ACCESS future internet ISSN 1999-5903 www.mdpi.com/journal/futureinternet Article Raising Risk Awareness on the Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies in Decision Making Processes Marco Prandini 1;* and Marco Ramilli 2 1 DEIS, Universita` di Bologna, Viale del Risorgimento 2, Bologna 40136, Italy 2 DEIS, Universita` di Bologna, Via Venezia 52, Cesena 47521, Italy; E-Mail:[email protected] * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-051-209-3867; Fax: +39-051-209-3073. Received: 27 April 2012; in revised form: 14 July 2012 / Accepted: 19 July 2012 / Published: 9 August 2012 Abstract: In the recent past, the so-called “Web 2.0” became a powerful tool for decision making processes. Politicians and managers, seeking to improve participation, embraced this technology as if it simply were a new, enhanced version of the World Wide Web, better suited to retrieve information, opinions and feedbacks from the general public on subjects like laws, acts and policies. This approach was often naive, neglecting the less-obvious aspects of the technology, and thus bringing on significant security problems. This paper shows how, in the end, the result could easily be the opposite of what was desired. Malicious attackers, in fact, could quite easily exploit the vulnerabilities in these systems to hijack the process and lead to wrong decisions, also causing the public to lose trust in the systems themselves. Keywords: Web 2.0; e-government; security; decision making 1. Introduction In 1999 Darcy DiNucci introduced the term Web 2.0 in her article entitled: “Fragmented Future” [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture Notes
    cis3.5 fall2009 lecture II.1 what is a network? topics: • when computers talk to each other, this is called a network • internet overview • the network can have different kinds of computers and peripherals attached to it • creating graphics on the internet with “Processing” • networks in which computers are physically connected to each other in the close resources: geographical proximity are called local area networks (LANs) • Processing web site: http://www.processing.org/ • other networks are called wide area networks (WANs) • getting started tutorial: http://www.processing.org/learning/gettingstarted/ • the internet is a wide area network • drawing tutorial: http://www.processing.org/learning/drawing/ • the internet is an open system = “a system whose architecture is not a secret” • reference: http://www.processing.org/reference/index.html • protocol = set of rules for how computers communicate with each other; for example: – TCP: transmission control protocol (computer ↔ computer) – IP: internet protocol (computer ↔ computer) – HTTP: hypertext transfer protocol (computer ↔ browser) – FTP: file transfer protocol (computer ↔ computer) – SMTP: simple mail transfer protocol (computer ↔ mail client) cis3.5-fall2009-sklar-lecII.1 1 cis3.5-fall2009-sklar-lecII.1 2 what is the internet? some internet facilities • history • the world wide web – ARPAnet (circa 1971): used “NCP” – HTML = hypertext markup language – TCP (1974): hardware independent, open – hyperlink – internet was standardized in September 1981 – browser • the internet is NOT the
    [Show full text]