Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 22:40, Edward Cherlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We might want to go further, and allow a discussion channel for every shared activity. Switching between a visual session and Chat will get old real fast, unless we provide a way to (in effect) Tivo shared sessions. Overlay Chat is still on the drawing board. We have had some discussions about the UI. It may be possible to provide this purely in Sugar, without activities requiring any changes. Alternatively, it's certainly possible to add chat functionality to any existing activity, since the sharing is done on top of a chat room. The only issue is figuring out how to integrate it into the UI. I would be happy to advise anyone working on this. Regards Morgan ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
[sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
It obvious occurred to me after seeing some questions posed on the OLPC-Sur list: 4. There is an inventory of what activities can be used with mesh, nor what ways. 5. The mesh is only capable of some form of collaboration in small groups. Why don't we add a new field in the Activities page template that indicates both whether or not an activity supports some form of collaboration and, if so, what is the supported number of collaborators. (The latter may, of course, be somewhat fuzzy depending upon the nature of the connection: via school server or under a tree). We could have a simple set of options (the numbers perhaps need tuning): A) no collaboration B) pair-wise collaboration C) small (3-4) group collaboration D) classroom (10-20) collaboration We could break down collaboration a bit further: sharing interacting ??? and we may want to comment on, for example, how many Type A collaborations can be supported at once. An example of: A is Turtle Art B is Distance C is Write D is Chat We'd need to do some serious QA to figure this out, but I think it would go a long ways towards giving people a sense of what they can expect in terms of a robust use of Sugar. -walter ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 09:17, Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It obvious occurred to me after seeing some questions posed on the OLPC-Sur list: 4. There is an inventory of what activities can be used with mesh, nor what ways. *no* inventory I presume. I have a list of collaborative activities on http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Collaboration_Central (which hasn't been updated lately) but that is a more developer-oriented page, so it gives details on implementation not features. 5. The mesh is only capable of some form of collaboration in small groups. The current implementation with the XO's mesh network and telepathy-salut is only capable of small group collaboration - such that other small groups are on separate mesh channels or geographically dispersed so that they cannot see each other. As soon as you have too many XOs on the mesh on one channel, all collaboration fails. The number of XOs depends on the level of activity which can only be determined through much testing. For example, you can have more XOs seeing each others' presence in the Neighborhood view if none of them are running shared activities. Activities that put load on the network reduce the number. Our current scenarios include: * Ad hoc collaboration on the mesh (fully-connected, everyone can see everyone else) * Ad hoc collaboration on the mesh (geographically dispersed, requiring mesh routing) * Ad hoc collaboration on a wireless access point * Server based collaboration (using the jabber server) on the mesh (fully-connected) * Server based collaboration (using the jabber server) on the mesh (dispersed) * Server based collaboration on a wireless access point Release 8.2 may have control panel options to adjust the mesh TTL to help with the fully-connected mesh scenarios. The server scalability work (Gadget) will probably only be available in Release 9.1. Cerebro is being looked at for improving the ad hoc collaboration. There are currently no time frames for its use. Why don't we add a new field in the Activities page template that indicates both whether or not an activity supports some form of collaboration and, if so, what is the supported number of collaborators. (The latter may, of course, be somewhat fuzzy depending upon the nature of the connection: via school server or under a tree). We could have a simple set of options (the numbers perhaps need tuning): A) no collaboration B) pair-wise collaboration C) small (3-4) group collaboration D) classroom (10-20) collaboration We could break down collaboration a bit further: sharing interacting ??? and we may want to comment on, for example, how many Type A collaborations can be supported at once. An example of: A is Turtle Art B is Distance C is Write D is Chat We'd need to do some serious QA to figure this out, but I think it would go a long ways towards giving people a sense of what they can expect in terms of a robust use of Sugar. We do need to get http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Collaboration_network_testbed going again, to get some idea of the numbers. My understanding is that OLPC's new location for the testbed in a more radio-quiet location will still take some time before it is operational. Since the performance depends on the activity on the entire network, the numbers you suggest would have to be assuming there are no other XOs on the network at all. Regards Morgan ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 03:17 -0400, Walter Bender wrote: We'd need to do some serious QA to figure this out, but I think it would go a long ways towards giving people a sense of what they can expect in terms of a robust use of Sugar. -walter As a related update on activities.sugarlabs.org. I really messed up the timing on approaching addons.mozzilla.org. I started the conversation with Mozilla on the day Firefox 3 was being released. I followed up 2 weeks later...when all of the amo people were frantically trying to fix addons that broke as a result of the upgrade. The lesson learned. Don't attempt to start stratigic discussion in the days immediately before or after a major release. I will pick this conversation back up in a few weeks when their work load settles down. Dfarning ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
Hi Walter, Thanks for scraping that off the sur list. +1 on the entire idea from me. My only concern is to try and keep it to one definitive page. This is the one I am currently aware of. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities Are you talking about updating that or something else? Thanks, Greg S *** Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:17:14 -0400 From: Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete To: sugar List sugar@lists.laptop.org, Education [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 It obvious occurred to me after seeing some questions posed on the OLPC-Sur list: 4. There is an inventory of what activities can be used with mesh, nor what ways. 5. The mesh is only capable of some form of collaboration in small groups. Why don't we add a new field in the Activities page template that indicates both whether or not an activity supports some form of collaboration and, if so, what is the supported number of collaborators. (The latter may, of course, be somewhat fuzzy depending upon the nature of the connection: via school server or under a tree). We could have a simple set of options (the numbers perhaps need tuning): A) no collaboration B) pair-wise collaboration C) small (3-4) group collaboration D) classroom (10-20) collaboration We could break down collaboration a bit further: sharing interacting ??? and we may want to comment on, for example, how many Type A collaborations can be supported at once. An example of: A is Turtle Art B is Distance C is Write D is Chat We'd need to do some serious QA to figure this out, but I think it would go a long ways towards giving people a sense of what they can expect in terms of a robust use of Sugar. -walter ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
It is very same page I am talking about, but I had made a template that is used by that page (Scott is the most recent one to have edited the template) and that is where I'd suggest we add the field for collaboration (and as was suggested, Journal use). I'll take a first pass, but as was pointed out, we have a lot of testing to do to before we can say anything very meaningful regarding the scale of the collaborations possible. In regard to the Journal, I thought we should indicate two bits of information: (1) does the activity record an entry in the Journal? and (2) does the activity put data objects into the Journal (as per Record, for example). Comments? -walter On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Walter, Thanks for scraping that off the sur list. +1 on the entire idea from me. My only concern is to try and keep it to one definitive page. This is the one I am currently aware of. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Activities Are you talking about updating that or something else? Thanks, Greg S *** Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:17:14 -0400 From: Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete To: sugar List sugar@lists.laptop.org, Education [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 It obvious occurred to me after seeing some questions posed on the OLPC-Sur list: 4. There is an inventory of what activities can be used with mesh, nor what ways. 5. The mesh is only capable of some form of collaboration in small groups. Why don't we add a new field in the Activities page template that indicates both whether or not an activity supports some form of collaboration and, if so, what is the supported number of collaborators. (The latter may, of course, be somewhat fuzzy depending upon the nature of the connection: via school server or under a tree). We could have a simple set of options (the numbers perhaps need tuning): A) no collaboration B) pair-wise collaboration C) small (3-4) group collaboration D) classroom (10-20) collaboration We could break down collaboration a bit further: sharing interacting ??? and we may want to comment on, for example, how many Type A collaborations can be supported at once. An example of: A is Turtle Art B is Distance C is Write D is Chat We'd need to do some serious QA to figure this out, but I think it would go a long ways towards giving people a sense of what they can expect in terms of a robust use of Sugar. -walter ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why don't we add a new field in the Activities page template that indicates both whether or not an activity supports some form of collaboration and, if so, what is the supported number of collaborators. (The latter may, of course, be somewhat fuzzy depending upon the nature of the connection: via school server or under a tree). +1 We could have a simple set of options (the numbers perhaps need tuning): A) no collaboration B) pair-wise collaboration C) small (3-4) group collaboration D) classroom (10-20) collaboration And other possibilities. For N-player games, we have discussed having two collaboration channels, one for in-game communications among players, and one for comments by kibitzers. I don't know of any team games in Sugar, where we might want to add a channel for each team. We could break down collaboration a bit further: sharing I would like to see all Activities sharable in the sense that others can at least watch what the primary user is doing. This would be useful for any activity accessing content on the Web, where one XO can download it and share it with others, instead of a whole class (for example) downloading a Web page simultaneously when instructed by the teacher. (Local caching on the school server will also help.) We might want to go further, and allow a discussion channel for every shared activity. Switching between a visual session and Chat will get old real fast, unless we provide a way to (in effect) Tivo shared sessions. We have had a discussion about sharing Measure channels to simulate a multi-channel digital oscilloscope. (I checked them out at Fry's a few days ago. Nice.) interacting ??? and we may want to comment on, for example, how many Type A collaborations can be supported at once. An example of: A is Turtle Art B is Distance C is Write There was a report of a test showing a fairly large number of simultaneous users, so I think this may become a D. D is Chat We'd need to do some serious QA to figure this out, but I think it would go a long ways towards giving people a sense of what they can expect in terms of a robust use of Sugar. I think we should have a brainstorming session on the complete list of activities, present and in development, to work out what we would like to see. Would people prefer to do that by e-mail, chat, or Wiki page? -walter ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar -- Edward Cherlin End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business http://www.EarthTreasury.org/ The best way to predict the future is to invent it.--Alan Kay ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
Re: [sugar] proposed addition to the Activities page templete
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 01:40:50PM -0700, Edward Cherlin wrote: I would like to see all Activities sharable in the sense that others can at least watch what the primary user is doing. insert obligatory comment about remote X + multi-pointer X. (Ask jg for details). Michael ___ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
