[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] Remove the naming alert in 0.86

Simon Schampijer simon at schampijer.de
Thu Sep 3 17:29:19 EDT 2009

Hi Gary,

On 09/03/2009 01:21 AM, Gary C Martin wrote:
> Hi Simon,
> On 2 Sep 2009, at 16:35, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>> On 09/02/2009 01:32 PM, Christoph Derndorfer wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:36 AM, Simon
>>> Schampijer<simon at schampijer.de>wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> some of you may know, I am doing a Sugar Pilot here in Germany. I
>>>> try to
>>>> keep my blog (listed on the sugarlabs planet as well) about my findings
>>>> up to date [1]. For technical findings (how to setup nfs, ldap on
>>>> Fedora
>>>> for example) the plan is to use the wiki. 'Debatable things' I will try
>>>> to bring up on the mailing list as well.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Simon
>>>> [1] http://erikos.sweettimez.de/ --- Categories: Sugar, Deployment
>>>> and Teaching
>>>> [2] http://planet.sugarlabs.org/
>>> +1 on removing the “naming alert”, this has been bugging me since the
>>> day
>>> it's been introduced.
>>> Adding “rewards” to the Journal is something that David Van Assche
>>> and Gary
>>> C Martin discussed quite a bit Paris. Unfortunately nobody had the
>>> time to
>>> really follow up on these discussions with some actual code... :-/
>>> Looking forward to the next blog posts about your experiences in the
>>> school!
>>> Christoph
>> Let me post here from my blog post why I think it is important:
>> As much as I am a friend of highlighting the naming, tagging and
>> description purposes, I don’t think the alert is a good way to ‘enforce’
>> this. I think those actions are not first class ones. I am happy when
>> the kids understood the concept of the Journal a bit, but they will not
>> start to make better descriptions in the first Sugar days or weeks, with
>> or without the alert. For now, it is just a confusing dialog that pops
>> up when you close an activity. And later, once the kids would know about
>> the importance they would be better served with other tools. For example
>> an option in the activity toolbar (like we have for the title already).
>> From my experience I highly recommend to remove the alert, +1 when for
>> 0.86 already.
> Personally I'm not keen on it either. I pretty well always skip past it
> myself and have learnt to click Stop and tap return. But, being neither
> qualified on the pedagogical needs, nor having seen actual learners of
> out target age, I didn't want to rush forward and +1 Simon's proposal.

I have seen only one kid typing in the description field over the last 3 
days. Not sure, she understood the bigger picture though. I did not 
explain the concept of the Journal too much, I must admit. I think often 
when it comes to observation-driven assessment, that the long term user 
should be in the main focus. But in this case, I think the dialog does 
help much for neither of the users, first time nor long term ones. I 
think adding the ability to add tags and a description in the activity 
toolbar would be a big step forward.

> The main goal as I remember was to try and combat the slew of un-named
> Journal entries, but a good chunk of this was likely due to the Home
> favourite view always starting new activity instances. Now that it
> resumes by default, the Journal 'spam' has been cut down quite
> significantly (for me).


> Perhaps we drop this dialogue and then seriously take another look at
> improving the names automatically generated for new activity entries?
> Regards,
> --Gary

That would be a nice addition - not sure yet how that will look like in 
detail ;D. Though, the title is not only the most important descriptor. 
If the tags support land maybe people will start to use this to order 
their Journal entries.


More information about the IAEP mailing list