[p2pu-dev] Webcraft Technical Priorities (formerly) SoSI News

[Pippa Buchanan]

Taking this off Community and Dev lists and reminding everyone that the DEV
list is best for technical discussions as those who care and understand
about technology are most focussed on this list.

 If you have a specific requirement, bug report or feature request, please
use the Lighthouse system! As with any collaborative software project it is
important to keep track of the many requests from the community.

http://p2pu.lighthouseapp.com/dashboard

Using Lighthouse will still allow for discussion and comments but most
importantly let Zuzel be able to triage and prioritise issues in a tool
designed for such use.

As a main representative and manager of the Webcraft community I recognise
that there are many requirements specific to our users and they should be
appropriately identified and considered. Embedding content is one potential
approach, but it may also result in serious usability issues and along with
all other approaches should be considered appropriately. At the moment the
primary goal across P2PU  (with the blessing of School of Webcraft, one of
several main stakeholders) is to get a minimal viable product released.

After this point we have a baseline platform that we can use to
intelligently improve for all users of P2PU, not just specific use cases.

Personally, I would find it very confusing to have JSFiddle, etherpads,
source code etc included in the P2PU interface.  We already have access to
all these tools and maybe a viable way of integrating them into P2PU would
be to make the way we share links to specific content more intentionally
designed.

I'm happy to run a Webcraft specific community call about our technology
priorities once we know what the baseline platform is like and will
coordinate with Zuzel, Alison etc to determine the best way for us to
collectively identify and present our ideas.

Best,

Pippa









On 2 April 2011 12:36, Dan Diebolt <dandiebolt at gmail.com> wrote:

> It is a bit of a canard to say there is no obvious consensus and make no
> effort to reach consensus or gather further opinions by declaring a default
> action that effectively scuttles the issue.
>
> Moreover, it is not much of a technology decision to turn on a standard
> feature controlled by a configuration file of the CKEditor which is already
> installed:
>
> http://docs.cksource.com/CKEditor_3.x/Users_Guide/Rich_Text/IFrame
>
> Look at this from a WebCraft user or course organizer's perspective: The
> only real tool you are providing these people is a simple rich text editor
> and a stream of page creations. For anything else you have to go outside the
> platform to external tools and resources and you are preventing the ability
> to bring any of these these tools and resources closer to the platform for a
> more convenient and richer user experience. Within the platform a user can't
> upload any HTML, CSS, of JavaScript file, has no source code sharing or
> syntax hightligting capability, no collaborative editor or pad, no real-time
> communication services (chat, IM, IRC), no ability to aggregate URLs
> representing assignmnets or work products. These are bedrock requirements
> for WebCraft and other schools would have their set of core tools and
> resources.
>
> So what is the purpose of registering through P2PU when you have to go
> off-platform to get to the core tools and resources of any course? You are
> going to turn the P2PU platform into a ghetto if you don't integrate these
> core tools and resources into the platform.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.p2pu.org/pipermail/p2pu-dev/attachments/20110402/12c3b24d/attachment.html>