Martin,
First and foremost ASLO has to make sense to grade school kids and their
teachers. That's why I didn't care for GCompris as a category. Now
since we can give an Activity up to three Categories it might make sense
to have one for the stuff that comes pre-installed. Other than that,
does any kid or teacher care who maintains an Activity?
For ASLO we might want teachers to suggest categories based on subjects
taught. For instance, instead of "Documents" we might have "Reading"
and "Writing" or "Reading and Writing". Instead of "Media Creation" and
"Media Playing" we could have "Art" and "Music".
Among ourselves we can make any taxonomy we like, but for the public
face of Sugar Activities we have to remember the target audience.
Any discussion of taxonomy reminds me of grocery shopping on Sundays.
Whoever does the taxonomies for Jewel and Dominick's seems to have no
purpose in mind other than keeping me in the damned store as long as
possible. On the other hand Costco arranges stuff in reasonable categories.
James Simmons
Martin Dengler wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 05:34:29PM +0200, Sean DALY wrote:
I think that's a great idea - will be very helpful in identifying the
"classics".
It'd be great if the classifications found happened to, or could be
easily made to, be sensibly related to the classifications used for
quite some time now:
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy
Somthing like:
"SL-maintained" / "classics" / "core" <--> Fructose
"community-maintained" / "others" <--> Honey
"pre-installed [on SoaS]" <--> Starch/Cellulose
I'm not saying the existing Taxonomy is the sexiest or
most-comprehensible-to-the-outsider, but it's well-aligned with the
development/deployment processes and if we promote a completely
orthogonal categorization it may cause a troublesome impedence
mismatch.
thanks
Sean
Martin
_______________________________________________
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
