[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] ASLO Suggestion
jim.simmons at walgreens.com
Wed Jun 10 12:48:43 EDT 2009
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.
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
> 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:
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Sugar-devel