I would like to "tie up" 3 sites (separate domains) to each other, as one strategic business unit - where the main focus on each is:
1) a learning site
2) a community site
3) a news and “Marketplace”
My "wildest dream" is that the community should be as one system throughout all 3 sites, with possibility to have separate groups in the different sites for their own puposes – but still with the possibility to open up and interact with each other (like a comon atrium).
This brings me to the question of a possible multisite function with Anahita. Will my "wildest dream" be possible (at the moment) with Anahita, and if so - what would be the best praxis to design this in general?
Will it be possible to exstend integration with new domains along the way, or should the design and integration be done before starting up?
ps. hope this is the right place to post this - otherwise I will mowe it to where it belongs :)
I wish I could comment something more elaborate, but until we have the Anahita Social Engine 1.6 ready we won't be able to start experimenting with the Nooku Server multi-site features.
One thing I'm sure, we will perhaps be able to let 3 social networks exchange stories, however I think having a group shared amongst 3 different social networks would be Architecturally and logically incorrect. It is like having 3 people sharing one region of their brains. Something like a triplet with attached heads.
I have a concept in mind that you might be interested which is distributed social web. That is when an installation of Anahita (a social network) itself becomes a node and establishes lead, follow, or mutual relationships with other social networks and start exchanging stories. In that context members of one network can join another network using OAuth and Anahita Connect technologies.
These social network instances can be hosted separately or they all be on one codebase in multi-site mode.
I'm excited to see that I'm not the only one interested in multi-site features.
To add to the conversation, I would like to describe a need we have...
We are a philanthropic social network (Social Planet) and have individual projects set up as groups where people can join and participate. These projects usually have a set start date and completion date and require project management features to keep track of the project.
Once they are complete, the group either disbands or duplicates the project again.
But some of our groups are actually on-going programs that have multiple projects in multiple geographic locations within their scope. So the concept of one group representing a specific projects doesn't seem to work.
At this point, a network within a network seems like the best solution, but maybe subgroups would work too.
The structure of a network within a network might look something like this:
Social Planet (main network with supporting web pages)
- Project1 (group with project management features)
- Project2 (group with project management features)
-- Program1 (sub-network with supporting web pages)
--- Prog1 Project1 (group with project management features)
--- Prog1 Project2 (group with project management features)
-Program2 (sub-network with supporting web pages)
--- Prog2 Project1 (group with project management features)
--- Prog2 Project2 (group with project management features)
It would be great to have member profiles automatically log-in to the sub-networks and if people join up with a sub-network to automatically be included in the main Social Planet network.
Any comments or suggestions on how to accomplish this would be great!
Brent, is this similar to your needs or is it completely different?
@Dave Yes - this could look similar to what I had in mind
@Rastin Thank you for the input. Distributet social web sounds absolut interresting,and I have no doubt you will suggest a solution for the future - witch I would be very interrested in :) I could see "cluster groups" have been mentioned in another tread - and my challenge could look a bit similar to Daves.
But there is also a reason I am thinking in direction of 3 separate domains, as they should partly be separated with purpose - yet still together in a synergic family - as they are apeeling to 3 groups of interrest within the same onterrest sphere - and the idea of gluing them together in the possible communication would be to make a real "power offer" for the ones that has cross interrests, and therefore could be driven from the "easy entry" site - towards the "fee paying" site in the "chain":)
I think there's a confusion between what's multi-site and what's multi-networks. A multi-site in Anahita means different sites sharing the same codebase but each with different database (user sets). From the users perspective they are totally different sites. Imaging if Facebook and Twitter shared the same codebase then they would be considered multi-site. But multi-networks, is one single site that's created from several networks. The good example of these sites are like online project managements like assembla where each network is called a space and a user can join/leave each space. These two concepts are inherently different as in the multi-sites a person may have different identities in each site. but in the multi-networks a person maintains the same identity across all the networks.
The social network I have in mind, then probably should be a multinetwork, as I would like the possibillity of creating and using several networks with 1 sign in. (I just thought this was one of the main ideas for a multisite, and it will cover at least 3 diferent domaine names). Would this be posible with open ID?
In a distributed social web (Thanks rastin for this lead - I really think this could be part of an ultimate solution), - could it also be possible to interact with other solutions with „open social“ techology (like the new Sakai or other e), and would this mean using open ID?
Great explanation Arash. I too am interested in Multi-Network solution where users can join/leave a space with a single log-in.
Groups, as they stand now, isn't quite the answer though - because what I envisage is a "space" where members can join and see multiple groups each with a project management component.
With that in mind, we intend to have each group act as a discreet project - possibly within an on-going program.
E.g. Real Example on Social Planet
Social Planet - Philanthropic Social Network
-- Nepali Hydro - Project (Hydro-electric project in the Himalayas managed by Social Planet)
- Angels In Flight (AIF) - On-going Program (JetBlue Airlines Action Group)
-- Sewing Center, Costa Rica - Project (Learning Center for Single Mothers managed by AIF)
-- Sewing Center, El Salvador - Project (Learning Center for Single Mothers managed by AIF)
-- Sewing Center, Colombia - Project (Learning Center for Single Mothers managed by AIF)
If you want to see what we are doing now, you can visit http://www.SocialPlanet.org
Arash, is this type of structure something you feel the Anahita platform will be able to support?
I am very excited about the possibility of migrating Social Planet to the Anahita platform and I am looking forward to where this conversation leads.
At this point, I know of nothing that allows me to do this. I would think that if you are looking to provide a platform that blows the competition away and is attractive to entrepreneurs that are looking to provide large-scale solutions on a massive scale with huge numbers of members, this would be the ticket.
Thanks again for your development efforts!
But multi-networks, is one single site that's created from several networks.
I do think multi-site can also be considered multi-networks as long as they are networked with each other correctly.
@Brent - I was wondering if you had found a workable solution for your multiple site issue? I want to build a similar solution where I have multiple sites with a common underlying user platform that combines Anahita as the social engine. I currently have a solution using Joomla Multi Sites and Jomsocial that enables me to share a common Jomsocial platform across multiple domains, but I have found Anahita to be leagues ahead of Jomsocial as a social platform.
I'm really sold on the Nooku/Anahita platform, but I am at a bit of a loss on how to implement the solution I want to build. I need to be able to share common user data across domains in an integrated manner. I can probably hack something together, but looking ahead, I would like to keep a clear upgrade path open - which is something that I have really been battling with - with the Joomla/Jomsocial solution.
I'm really tired of having to re-install everything (including all add-ons, and my own hacks) every time Jomsocial upgrades their platform. The compatibility issues are a real nightmare, which is obviously one of the main reasons why we all like the Nooku solution.
Can anyone offer me some of their wisdom on the subject?
I will leave the words of wisdom to be told by other people here at Anahitapolis, but my present conclution on this topic so far, is formed by the following:
1)Quoted from Arash: " A multi-site in Anahita means different sites sharing the same codebase but each with different database.
2)Quoted from Rastin:"I do think multi-site can also be considered multi-networks as long as they are networked with each other correctly."
3) Quoted from Rastin: "...until we have the Anahita Social Engine 1.6 ready we won't be able to start experimenting with the Nooku Server multi-site features."
If I understand it right, the strategy should be to make and nurture some selected individual installations now, and then try to integrate them later into a network of networks - first as multi-network/multi-space, and when time is right - to emerge into a "distributed social web". As soon as Nooku/Anahita is ready for multisite - I guess this will make the administration easier, so I will wait patiently for that to come.
I have also looked at a soloution called "Jentla" - claiming to provide premium multi-site solutions for joomla, but I have this intuitive believe that Nooku/Anahita will be be the most "rock´n roll" solution in the field - so I just wait, and hope I prepare the startup with a useful design in order to scale up a little by little, whithout starting from square one again :)
@Bent thank you very much for answering Robin's question. Very well put!
@Robin as Bent mentioned we have to build the multi-site concept first and see how it will turn out, then we can provide more detailed help about it. What's certain that we are very keen to have that functionality in Anahita by using the Nooku Server as the web application platform of choice rather than Joomla! CMS.
Thanks for sharing that Rastin. I too will wait and I will also volunteer our existing organization as beta for your development if that is of interest. ;-)
Thanks Brent and Rastin. I'm still wrapping my head around the terminology that is being used in the community. I would also gladly volunteer my sites/domain cluster and time to get this functionality working.
You must be logged in to comment!