On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Guys, > > This is a great discussion and very helpful design interaction! > > Just sampling a few items on this thread I have two high level comments: > > 1 - The primary requirement for the Journal is to never lose data. I > think there are some known issues with the datastore but I'm not sure > where they are tracked. The most important case is to not lose data when > the users exits the activity or keeps. The secondary case is to do > interim saves so that if the XO or activity crashes or the XO is shut > down we still save something recent. > > Please don't try to extend the Journal paradigm until we nail, provably > and completely. > > 2 - In terms of better organization of Journal data. It hasn't come up > as a problem from the field in my experience. It can still be improved > and making it easier to optimize the available storage seems like a high > priority based on NAND full issues. We should still consider better data > organization and access, especially if we can make something that really > resonates with kids. We especially need to address saving and accessing > in the collaborative creation process. > > The concern I have with the discussion so far is that its way too > complicated. I don't think any K - 6 grade kid will have a good > conception of a "tree" or hierarchy. It will be incomprehensible and > work like black magic to them. Even the idea that the newest is at the > top is not universal (see: > http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/localization/2008-September/001583.html). > The notion of "size" or quantity is not the same for a kid as an adult > either. One Piaget experiment I read about showed that most kids below a > certain age would assume that 5 items spread far apart were more than 6 > items placed close together. Throw in many items of the same screen > space each with a different size in MBs and they will completely miss > that one quantity is more than the other. > > I don't mean to make this impossible to design. I suggest that we make > sure we nail the reliability piece first. Then come up with some > experiments which cover use cases and include mock-ups. Then test them > with kids. If we design this based on our own understanding of what > works for us, we can make something useful and interesting but it may > not be optimized for kids. Optimizing for the ways kid's minds work is > something we can do better than anyone else, if we can get good at it. > > My 2 cents. I apologize for being such a skeptic. Lately I feel like I'm > swimming up stream. If the river is flowing towards consensus and we can > make something short term which we can learn from, don't let me slow you > down.
A huge +1 by me on this, Greg. Despite being the one that incouraged Tomeu to explore versions... Marco _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
