[Sugar-devel] Concept Mapping Activity and Labyrith

[Gary Martin]

On 14 Feb 2011, at 20:25, Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de> wrote:

> On 02/14/2011 02:10 PM, Nagarjuna G wrote:
>> This is a proposal for discussion to develop concept mapping mode
>> within Labyrinth or as an independent activity using the code base of
>> Labyrinth.  I elaborate below how Labyrinth can be developed/modified
>> further to support concept mapping.
>> 
>> 1.  Concept mapping requires, unlike mind maps, names/labels to be
>> given to each link.
>> 2.  A mode switch can be provided to change between mind maps and concept maps.
>> 3.  Keeping the map while in concept map mode should create a file
>> which stores mode preference + the map.
>> 4. Concept mapping requires multiple parents (this is possible in
>> labyrith, but by delinking the nodes after making them.)  We can
>> possibly achieve this by adding a node with a KeyPress + MouseClick on
>> the canvas.
>> 5.  Concept mapping requires cross links between nodes (this is
>> already possible in Labyrinth)
>> 6.  An option to keep in CmapTools format (which is an XML ecnoding)
>> for data exchange between other concept mapping apps.
>> 
>> I would like to know what your reactions are to this proposal.  Please
>> comment on the feasibility.
>> 
>> gnowledge lab (http://lab.gnowledge.org) can undertake this
>> development work with help from the current developers of Labyrith.
>> Of course, if the current team is happy to implement these features,
>> that will be wonderful.  Our lab does teacher training on Sugar in
>> India, and we desperately need a free concept mapping application.
>> Once I hear your views, we can start the work as soon as possible.
>> 
>> thanks in advance
>> --
>> Nagarjuna
> 
> Hi Nagarjuna,
> 
> thanks for sharing your interest! Actually we were talking about this need here at OLPC (today!!!) as well. The Concept Maps are often used in education. If you would find ways to enhance Labyrinth, that would be great. For example, changing the color of a bubble might work as a first step to indicate the relationship:
> 
> (Sugar)
>   |
> (UI)
>   |
> (GNOME)
> 
> Having the 'UI' bubble in another color than the 'Sugar' and 'GNOME' bubble would indicate that it is an relationship. I am sure there are other and better ways - just a quick idea.

There was a quick fix added to make floating text labels that I was not really happy with from a design perspective, but folks were hollering for it and I had no time to work on it, so I let it pass. What should have happened is for the label tool button to actually be a thought style button. It would at minimum allow 1) the default box style as is; 2) a line style (where the spline link forms a horizontal line under the text AKA a labeled link as is being requested now for concept maps); 3) none, so text can just float on its own like a label. That would have covered much of the needs I've seen mentioned.

Regarding colour, the plan was to use user fill/stroke colour during collaborative editing of a single map (not yet implemented), so that each user could see who was editing/adding what thought, with all other unfocused thoughts showing in a monochrome style, hence no options to tinker with thought colours.

--Gary.

> Looking forward to hear more on this,
>   Simon
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel