XSweet 1.0!

We have 1.0 of the docx -> HTML transformation tool XSweet out today! It also has a new site:


XSweet is a finely crafted tool. It takes docx files, those horrible mangy MS Word files, and translates them into clean, lovely, HTML. XSweet is open source, modular, and very nicely done.

A huge tip of the hat to Wendell Piez (XML guru), and to Alex Theg. As geeky as it sounds, I loved watching these two chat about the issues they encountered making this software. The attention to detail was really unbelievable. Amazing work. XSweet is a finely crafted tool.

More info on Coko https://coko.foundation/announcing-xsweet-1-0/

If you want to do a deep dive into why I think this is important, I wrote this some time ago – https://www.adamhyde.net/typescript-redistributing-labor/



So, you may never have heard of OLPC, but it was quite a thing. OLPC = One Laptop per Child. A project initiated by MIT. Its mission was to change the world – essentially to educate millions of kids that did not have much in the way of educational resources. The basic idea was to make really really cheap laptops and then get them to kids that needed them. The Laptop was pretty innovative at the time as there was no such thing as a ‘small factor’ laptop back then. You just had big, expensive, laptops. OLPC tried to get the price down by innovating in form factor and the attendant technologies like screens…


It was a pretty cool thing.

Anyways… there was an interesting article that a friend passed to me about it. I just landed in NZ, so I’m pretty knackered and can’t quite write what I want to write about this now. But here is the link:


I’m writing about it here as I was pretty close to the project. In fact, I facilitated all the documentation and worked closely with Walter Bender and the crew. We (FLOSS Manuals) did a few Book Sprints to create the docs and as it happens I found this old, old vid online from that time:

I found the OLPC project deeply flawed. It was a movement without proper resourcing and an untethered ambitious aim. But I liked Walter and many of the people involved. It was interesting to watch this whole thing unpack slowly infront of me. Anyways… will read the article more thoroughly when I’m more present and make some more comments from my own experience of the project.

continued…. actually, I slurped up a coffee and read the article more closely. It’s pretty accurate. I realised things were topsy with the OLPC when I discovered the reason why we were doing docs (apart from them not having any in the first place) was because the laptops were selling at (something like) $180 a unit, but costing $186 (0r something) per unit in support costs alone. They were making a loss on each machine purely on support costs. It wasn’t a surprise to me as many people needed a manual just to work out how to open it up…

1 2



But I have to say, Walter Bender was the real deal. Super smart and humble as pie. He had his heart and vision in the right place, and if he had been supported the OLPC project would not have lived and died as a hardware project. His vision was much greater and worthy but, as the article discussed, didn’t get the traction over the sexy hardware sell.

Anyway… some of the manuals we made are still online šŸ™‚


It was even translated to Farsi and a heap of other languages that are only to be found now in the Internet Archive (eg Greek, Arabic and others). The docs were also available in book form, electronic book, and on the laptops themselves.

117 one-laptop-per-child-nicolas-negroponte-9 software_activities_11 2952057847_42de996872_b img_3342

Things I think Open Source Needs to Address

Following on from my previous post… here are some issues I think the Open Source movement needs to address:

  1. Where is Open Source Failing?
    I believe a discussion is needed about why there is a failure of OpenĀ Source to capture the desktop and web platform space. We have some successes, notably WordPress and Chrome, Firefox, but generally speaking these two categories of software are a big fail for Open Source. How come?
  2. Are we past the era of licenses and code?
    Open Source has been preoccupied with notions of code and licensing since it started. That’s fair enough, given that the first couple of decades have been about establishing fundamentals. But aren’t we past this moment? Can’t we count issues such as licensing pretty much as solved and move on? Is it now time to put other issues at the center of the culture?
  3. Becoming a full stack culture…
    Open Source, the culture, the values, the toolset, the lexicon, all value code and developing code above all else. When will Open Source embrace all roles in software development and value them equally… what does that kind of project look like? What does a network of different skill sets need to thrive?
  4. Diversity/Gender
    This is being addressed to some degree in the last years at various open source conferences and get togethers… however, it would be good to face up to the fact that (as far as I can tell) women make up < 10% (10% seems to be the high end of estimations) of all developers in Open Source… this isn’t something just for discussion, this is an issue which required urgent action. We also need to ask ourselves why do less women participate in Open Source than in proprietary software culture?
  5. The Open Source Cultural Method
    Open Source is a culture/method for solving problems. Where can this be improved? What can we borrow from existing Software Development Life Cycles that may improve our game?
  6. Open Source tools…
    What do we need to change in existing workflow tools (eg gitlab/github) to enable Open Source culture to improve? What innovations can we bring to beat the proprietary projects?
  7. Solidarity
    What does it mean to show solidarity for other open source projects? Do we need to do it? Do we expect this from other projects towards what we are working on?
  8. Challenging cultural community tropes
    What are the failings of community staplesĀ such as the Benevolent Dictator for Life? Is open source really any different from other types of collaboration? Why do we think it’s special? What can we learn from other community efforts of shared production? What tropes hold value and which are unhealthy?
  9. Encouraging Criticism
    Why aren’t there active critical voices encouraging healthy criticism? What does that say about the culture?

This is just a starter…I am sure there are many other issues that need to be put front and center. These areĀ my starting 9…

Where are the Open Source Critics?

I hear a lot of stupid arguments about open source. For example, this article is particularly flawed. Silly comments like “Not getting paid while seeing major corporations make hay from your volunteer labor both erodes good will.” is full of so many strange assumptions I don’t really know where to start unpacking it.

But… leaving all this aside, I do believe open source needs criticism. Well-founded, reasoned, criticism. Criticism on points of culture, on diversity, on where the open source cultural method is failing, on what open source doesn’t do well. Any movement needs this kind of refreshing of the dialog so that it can improve and, as it matures, help it tackle the next generation of issues it needs to solve.

However, for many years I believe we have seen a failure of informedĀ  criticism of open source. I can find many who herald open source as a wonderful movement, but I do not see healthy criticism. Without it, open source risks being stuck and not moving on, which can very well be not only damaging but eventually terminal for the movement.

Open Source Successes

Believe it or not there is a bit of an active campaign out there to discredit Open Source in the publishing world. I’m pretty sure this is because the nay sayers are feeling a little threatened, else why comment on it at all?

So, just for the record…here are some examples of successful open source projects…

1. The Internet

Yup. The underlying infrastructure for the internet is all open…TCP and IP, also known as TCP/IP, the governing communications protocols among all computers on the Internet, are both open. Don’t forget also that the Berkeley Internet Name Domain, otherwise known as BIND, is open source, and is by far the most common way to publish and resolve Domain Name Service (DNS) queries. Without it, you would type ‘http://google.com’ into your browser location bar and nothing would happen…

2. The Web

Let’s not forget that the internet and the web are not the same things. The internet is that hidden substructure that enables information to ferret around all over the world. The web is what surfaces that info up to you to consume in the browser and other mechanisms. It’s no surprise that the vast market share of browsers are open source now that IE (closed) has fallen to a wee 12-15% or so of the market and Chrome (open) has risen to hold the majority share (somewhere around 60%). Firefox is coming in around 12-15% also. I got my stats from here – https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx

Why, do you wonder, did IE fall so far from grace? Could it be that Open Source enables a faster adoption rate?…cause…y’know …it’s free …maybe…

3. Your Computer

Whats that? I hear you say…”I don’t use Linux!”…. yeahyeah…Ā  but do you use Apple? The under-the-hood OS that enables the pretty bells and whistles is the BSD Kernel (the core of the operating system) and that is licensed under BSD, one of the most permissible and liberal Open Source licenses. In fact, Open Source now beats Windows (the only major proprietary OS) in total user-facing operating system market share (including mobile devices, see below) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems).

4. Your Phone

And your tablet! In the world of mobile devices, Open Source is just killing closed source operating systems hands down (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_operating_system).

5. Your Website

Yep. over 25% of all websites in the world are run by…WordPress…that humble, non-threatening, simple blogging engine is now an internet monster. It is also by far the most popular CMS in the world. See https://om4.com.au/wordpress/market-share/

Also, don’t forget that your WordPress site is probably delivered to the world by an Apache web server which is open source and holds 50% of the market share (http://www.perfectleads.com/marketshare/apache) which, together with nginx, means open source holds about 65% of the web server market.

And more…

Well, so much more…. Publishers have been skeptical of open source for a very long time but they don’t seem to realise their businesses are built on top of it… They literally could not operate without open source…Ā  It’s like a homeowner complaining that they don’t think plumbing, as an approach to delivering water, works. Or that houses are a bad idea. I’m at a bit of a loss to what to say to such folks…

Designing for All

At Coko we are tackling the long unsolved problem of design in Open Source. I have written a bit about this elsewhere, and it is a hard problem to solve, mainly because it is not solved anywhere – there are no good community models for this and very little discourse about the issue.

Design, of course, covers many things. I am chiefly talking about UX, although we have also solved the problem of designing for users by getting users (I prefer to call them ‘use case specialists’) to design their own systems. But this is not about that. I want to talk just about community processes for UX that will yield common best practices, while also enabling each organisation to realise their desired aesthetics ie achieve the look and feel they want that best reflects their organisation. As reflected in the following screenshots of xpub-Hindawi, xpub-eLife, and xpub-collabra:




There are several mechanisms that we have employed to achieve this. The first is that we have ‘elevated’ design to the same level of value in the community as code. I say ‘elevated,’ not because we had to raise its value in the Coko community, but rather the estimation of the value of design in the open source community at large is very low. So, against this, as a baseline, at Coko we have chosen to value design more than in your typical open source project. Also, I don’t want that to imply there are other disciplines in the software development process that do not rank as highly as these two – documentation, feedback, testing and so on… these are all equally valued alongside design and code, but for now I want to focus just on UX design.

To ‘elevate’ design, it took just the simple step of stating it to be so. As the co-founder of this community I have some sway over the direction and form of the culture. So I cashed out some of this capital to make a very simple statement when I was facilitating a community meeting that we must value design as much as we value code. It was this simple statement that set a placeholder for building processes that put design in the value-center of the community.

Next, when there was a call for more processes to assist communication across the various orgs, I made sure we had two work groups which each consisted of one person from each collaborating organisation. These two foundational WorkGroups were the Dev WorkGroup and the Design WorkGroup.

The Design WorkGroup then went ahead and started discussing how we might contribute to a platform where each org could have the look and feel they wanted. It was a process of first understanding the problem and then working through possible solutions. It was necessarily like this, a process of discovery before implementation, because there are not very many established or discussed processes like this in the open source world that we could follow (as mentioned above). So we have to discoverĀ the problem, and then invent a solution.

The problem boils down to small levels of abstraction. Interfaces are, after all, made up of many small parts. The problem therefore resided in how to account for different stylistic approaches to, what we now call, atoms (see Brad Frost’s article on Atomic Design), and how atoms fit together to form ‘molecules’ ie. we needed a level of abstraction that would allow any org to have the look and feelĀ  they wanted for an (eg) button, and also how that button was situated with other elements.

Julien Taquet (Coko) and Nick Duffield (eLife) met with Yannis Barlas (Coko) in Athens for three days to thrash this out.


They came up with an agreed common set of standardised CSS attributes per UI element, and associated reusable CSS variables that could be used across any UX element.

You can see these lists here…

  1. Color Variables
  2. Typography Variables
  3. Form Variables
  4. Spacing Variables

That is the simple starting point. In effect, this means that if any organisation designs a feature using UI elements (eg a login form) they can use these shared style names and populate them with their own values. This means another org’s stylesheet will apply equally well to inherited/reusable components as it does to the ones they build themselves.

Which seems simple: it is… but understanding the problem space, and where the commonality lies, was half the battle.

The group has now also identified a common set of UI elements that can be reused and are iterating through this list, designing them as they go. See https://gitlab.coko.foundation/pubsweet/design/issues/21

This is required because even the simplest UI element may have several contexts it has to account for. Take the example of a ‘simple’ button, one of the simplest UI elements of them all…. however, there are actually 5 different button states that must be accounted for – the default state, active, hover, pressed and disabled. In each case, the style variables must be applied appropriately. See here for more information – https://gitlab.coko.foundation/pubsweet/design/issues/19

So, it’s not quite as easy as it might first seem.. the good news is that the teams are very committed to working through these issues, as without doing this groundwork, components are really not reusable.


The result is you can grab components that another org has made, be it a page-based component (eg. Dashboard), or a molecule (eg a Staff Assignment dropdown) and plug it into your system and it will look like it is part of your system.

We are making good progress on all of this, including now integrating common best practices for accessibility into the design process. Also, since this groundwork has come quite far, new orgs joining the Coko community can benefit a lot from the work already done and pick up components from theĀ shared/common UX stylebook and integrate them… pretty cool….