24 Responses

  1. Michal Pisarek May 23, 2011 / 2:04 pm

    Great video!
    Nicely shows the differences but I especially like how you show the ability to have default metadata that make the whole process whole much easier for end users.

  2. Rob Schlotman May 23, 2011 / 8:15 pm

    Very well said on a topic that isn’t trumpeted enough but makes a huge difference.

  3. Scott Haas September 29, 2011 / 7:30 pm

    Chris, This video started from a discussion we had way back when. I haven’t been able to look at it (too busy) until today. Thank you!! What an excellent job and gracious misuse (lol, not for me though) of your time. I now understand much better. I was sold at about the 10 minute mark. Again, thanks so much…BRAVO!!


    • Chris Poteet September 30, 2011 / 12:34 am

      Glad it was of assistance.

      • Rob Harrington October 3, 2011 / 1:29 pm

        Chris –

        I agree with everything you presented, but the security thing concerns me. While we are not “high security” in our organization, we do limit interdepartmental use to viewing and not editing other department’s files. I could resolve this as well as the ability to send more targeted alerts (can’t send an alert at the folder level) by using multiple document libraries, but then if I understand correctly, views don’t work across doclibs without implementing web parts. So I have three questions and / or topics for other blogs or videos:

        1. What are your thoughts on having multiple document libraries and when is the right time to use multiple vs. a singular document library in a site.
        2. How do you aggregate list data across multiple doclibs?
        3. Your thoughts on properly configuring targeted alerts.

        • Chris Poteet October 4, 2011 / 3:54 pm

          Rob, good questions. On the library design issue, I need to write a post about; but from a high level I start thinking about new libraries when (a) the information is qualitatively different than other information and it makes sense to separate, (b) security, (c) when I want to use custom content types in different areas, and (d) want alerts on only a specific type of document.

          To aggregate data across multiple libraries use the content query web part. If necessary to rollup similar documents/items across multiple libraries use a shared content type.

          The alert question is more tricky. I’m not sure exactly what you mean by “targeted alerts,” unless you mean you only want alerts for certain types of documents. OTB SharePoint is very limited as you’ve seen, I’d suggest surveying some third party products for this.

  4. Jacques November 2, 2011 / 11:16 am

    Hi Chris,

    Thank you very much for all the information and the posts, they have been very helpful. I recently did my MS courses on SP 2010 and am in the planning & testing phase of implementing foundation in my work place. (Whetting their appetities so I can get server soon) :)

    One question I have is regarding securities, one of my subsites to the intranet is to be an HR and Payroll site, the conundrum here is that their are 3 levels of users HR L1 which has full access only to level 1 staff, HRL2 which has full access to Level 1 & 2 staff as well view rights to Payroll and Payroll which has full access to all levels.

    From what I have read the best bet in making this happen is to use 3 different Document libraries for the 3 different access levels (l1, L2 & Payroll), this however means; for a holistic view of all data my higher level users would needs be traverse the 3 sites. You can hear the objections already.

    The workaround as I see it is to use a query/shared content web part on a site page? Would this filter out the data based on the user accessing the web part? e.g. L1 would only see their library in the QL and only see their allowed data in the web part but L2 &Payroll would see all the content?

    I am all for moving away from folders as my organisation is a great example of messy duplication and poor discipline.


    • Chris Poteet November 2, 2011 / 9:35 pm

      The content query web part will respect security settings. Although if you’re not talking about a lot of content, your particular case might work with one library with three folders. I’m the first to say that folders are past their prime, but I think security is the best reason to consider them if you don’t have a lot of content you want to secure. Sometimes creating three libraries for a small amount of content is worse than a single library with a few top level folders.

      • Jacques November 3, 2011 / 12:37 am

        Thanks for the prompt feedback, I’ll play around with the different options and post my findings if I think them worthy.

      • Jacques November 8, 2011 / 1:49 am

        Hi Chris,

        After playing around between folders and content type metadata and reading some interesting articles online regarding metadata security (TITUS has this add on already) I can only but think that MS will not be too far in incorporating this in soon.

        As such I have decided the 3 libraries is the way to go as when metadata security is eventually incorporated I will simply have to merge the libraries and not dispose of my folders.

        I would rather lay the foundation now than change the foundation later, thanks again.


  5. Oleksandr January 24, 2012 / 9:49 am

    Awesome video. Proper outline of the much under-demonstrated topic in Sharepoint world. Everyone talks about how we should abandon folders and only material such as this video goes all the way to actually get the hands dirty and show more than mere words. Great job!

  6. Chris October 24, 2012 / 5:32 pm

    Overuse of the word “paradigm”

  7. Terry May 17, 2013 / 2:51 pm

    Nice post, the argument for metadata driven content organization / classification has never been more clear.

    At 13:23 or so in your video, you were showing the filtering availible via content types but the “folder” item was available for selection. i am having a similar problem and have tested on both 2010 and 2013 versions of SharePoint with the same result you have. My document library has all default content types removed, replaced by ONLY 3 customized ones but the “folder” content type keeps showing up.

    Ever find solution to this issue?

    • Chris Poteet May 19, 2013 / 10:32 pm

      So do you want to remove the folder content type? You can disable folders for the library.

  8. Jason June 5, 2013 / 1:27 pm

    Same issue as Terry. I’ve disabled folders in the library, but the Folder Content Type still shows up as an available content type. I’ve already removed Folders from the “Selected Hierarchy Fields” list, so it’s not that.

  9. Emily August 30, 2013 / 6:26 pm

    Love the video! My quandary is that my organization wants both folders and metadata. I am learning this on my own and so I have the problem of displaying my metadata with actual content type tags versus the default ‘Content Type’ tag. How to display the meta data with the content tag I want to use. As an example suppose I want to create a content type Operations Manual, below that I have the content type Policies, Procedures, and Reports. How would I properly display these content types in the treeview?

      • Emily September 3, 2013 / 8:08 am

        Thank you for your response! I was able to successfully complete that part of it before my comment. The problem I have is that my VP does not want the label Content Type. Instead he wants to see the word ‘Documentation’ where ‘Content Type’ current exist. Below that would be Polices, Process and Procedures, Reports, etc. How do I do that without involving Managed Metadata. I only have full control of the Operations site which is a sub-site of our parent site.

        • Chris Poteet September 3, 2013 / 9:16 am

          There’s no out-of-the-box way to change it that I know of. This will mean if it’s really important you have to try and change it with something like JavaScript.

  10. Bob October 17, 2013 / 4:09 pm

    Excellent video, Chris; the hidden potential within Sharepoint is amazing, but configuring a Site with these features is frankly a nightmare. With most organizations being understaffed and overworked to the max these days, average users needing to store files somewhere in Sharepoint, simply don’t have time to stop doing actual work, in order to immerse themselves in the extremely complicated theory and practice of engineering and building a complex information storage solution in Sharepoint that identifies all conceivable user needs and categories of metadata needed, how and where to implement which mechanisms, and how and where to find the controls and settings to create what you’ve shown us here. I’d suggest that any organization adopting Sharepoint should have at least one trained, advanced, certified Sharepoint ‘Jockey’ in every Department who spends 1000% of their time engineering these kinds of features and solutions for the worker bees. The plain fact is, no matter how coolly a doc lib is engineered, if a user can’t store and retrieve info as instantly as they can with file/folder structures, they won’t want to use it because every second that they waste, grappling with these complex issues, is a second lost from doing Actual Work. The more they are forced to grapple, the higher sress levels rise. I’ve often lamented that it sometimes seems that Msoft doesn’t much careif customers actually get any real work done with Microsoft’s tools and programs….as long as customers are fiddling, grappling, tweaking and twiddling with Microsoft’s tools and programs, or taking complicated courses from Microsoft. All this won’t stop me from trying to learn what you’ve showed us here, but I know it will be very slow going, even for me, a long-time ‘Sharepoint enthusiast’.

Comments are closed. If you have a question please contact me.