This is from the SOW:
June 1: Metadata wizard (AT)

July 1: OKC hardware and software system upgrade (AT).  I think you
wrote this before Jetspeed, ie anticipating major difference between AT
and RD systems.

Sep 30: Deployment of AT prototype, submission of a final report.
      OKC-RD completed, in production mode, with online help
documemtation
      And assessment capabilities.  Final OKC-RD report.


* We identified Jetspeed, which has many desirable features for the
distributed component system we envision.  

* Jetspeed delivers "shallow" content (i.e. only one link deep).  OKC
developers developed two new portlets that allow navigation within a
portlet.  That is, I can surf entire remote areas within a portlet
window.

* We set up the OKC using PET 1 web material.  This included static html
pages, pages with javascript, pages created dynamically from Perl
scripts.  This provided us with a wide range of material to experiment
with.  Jetspeed reconstructs HTML into Java objects with ECS, and ECS is
less forgiving of illegal html and javascript than commercial browsers,
so this was an important exercise.

* In addition to NAVO, ARL, ASC, and ERDC, we also obtained Web material
from CEN, CEA, CE, and SIP, for which we are very appreciative.  The
other Functional Areas were not responsive to our requests.

* We worked with CPOCs and MOS and HPTI management to define a content
approval process:  content is initially added to a testbed server,
reviewed by CPOCs.  The CPOC calls in additional reviewers if he judges
this necessary.  Approved material is promoted to the regular OKC.

* We ran preview tests of the OKC with all of the PET MOS and HPTI teams
invited to participate and comment.  The current OKC represents their
comments on look and feel (but we will have to follow up on this at the
users group meeting).  This was in our Statement of Work.

* Base hardware and software in place and running at IU by April 1, in
accordance with SOW.  

* Prototype OKC is currently available, beating the May deadline for
this.

* The system was extensively documented in a lengthy report available
from the OKC web site.  Report was delivered to ERDC CPOC and other OKC
management.  This was in our deliverables (OCK-AT) and was delivered on
time.

* We also have submitted a much briefer (6 page) overview of the OKC to
the International Multiconference on Computer Science.

* We solved the Netscape 4.x problem.  This was important because many
of the OKC users are Unix workstation based and NN 4.x is all they have.
This was a frequently reported bug.

* We also solved a firewall issue for ASC users (their firewall blocked
access to external servers on nonstandard ports, so we moved the OKC to
port 80).

* We are on track to deliver the Metadata wizard by the deadline, June
1.  Actually, I think it is already done (?).

* On April 4, we hosted an all-day meeting with a team from ERDC (Lesa
Nelson, Wes Monceaux, Patti Duett) to describe OKC efforts, discuss
deployment at ERDC.  The slides from this meeting are on the OKC site
(under OKC tab).

* We are developing an online training system with guidance from MSRC
training coordinators/tech leads (Lesa Nelson, Jennifer Moses, Brian
Tabor, Mason Colbert).  Mason will help us complete internal testing on
May 9-10, and we hope to role this out to the other training leads the
following week.

* We developed a newsgroup system that is ready to be tested.  

* The SIP team has presented us with a long wish list of features (and
Bill Zilliox has augmented).  We are hosting a meeting with John
Nehrbass on May 9-10 to discuss these, particularly their request for an
email archiving system.  We are making a custom filter for the newsgroup
system to support this, and the SIP team should be able to start using
this as early as week of May 13.  We will have follow up meetings with
Stan Ahalt and the rest of the SIP team at the users group meeting to
discuss SIP wish list.

* And we wish everyone else were as proactive as SIP.

* We will have an OKC presentation at the users group meeting in Austin

* We have requested a BOF for the Austin meeting as well.  If this does
not get scheduled, we will organize an informal BOF there.