[Building Sakai] [Management] Gradebook Situation

Fri Jul 30 09:47:31 PDT 2010

I wonder if a common server-side UX platform is even really something useful
to consider for Sakai 3. My understanding of Sakai 3 is that we are aiming
for an entirely different model of development and distribution that makes
the question moot.

Capabilities for Sakai 3 are developed on the "backend" with results exposed
as RESTful services that an entirely separate UX development on the
"frontend" can present results from and interact with—in other words, a very
clear separation of the logic and presentation layers.

I'm imagining a future where the Sakai 3 officially distributed by the SF is
mostly backend, along with a carefully crafted default UX for core
capabilities. The team that works on this central release is already
developing their own standards for UX development which I don't think
includes a server-side UX platform.

The rest (perhaps eventually bulk?) of Sakai 3 will be a way more wide open
repository of contributed capabilities that talk to that core and add
additional UX. In this arena, developers can use whatever UX technologies
they can get to work—including GWT. If you want wide adoption of and
additional developers working on your contributed capability, you'd do well
to develop closely to core standards, including those that address
cross-cutting concerns like usability, accessibility, localization, etc. If
you don't care, use whatever you want, but don't expect anyone to notice or
use your contribution.

The advantage of this model is a more closely engineered core with an open
contribution space where the technology diversity we decry in Sakai 2
becomes a positive thing, attracting more developers with different
skillsets and demonstrating different technologies.

Ideally, an additional distribution mechanism will be available that allows
the SF or others to package Sakai 3 core with selected additional
contributed capabilities, enabling "distributions" of Sakai 3 tailored for
specific uses.

There are other open source projects that use this model with substantial
success.

--
Nate Angell
Client Evangelist
http://www.rsmart.com
http://twitter.com/xolotl
http://xolotl.org

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Chambers, Sara J <schamber at indiana.edu>wrote:

> Thanks for summarizing.  I would like to broaden #5: There is significant
> interest in having a process to evaluate the pros and cons of various
> technologies and application architecture options.
>
> SJC
>
> Sara J. Chambers
> 812-855-7014 (office) 812-325-8151 (mobile)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Feldstein [mailto:michael.feldstein at oracle.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 11:07 AM
> To: Michael S Elledge; markjnorton at earthlink.net
> Cc: sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org; Chambers, Sara J
> Subject: RE: [Building Sakai] [Management] Gradebook Situation
>
> So far, here's what I'm hearing on this thread:
>
> 1. Everybody seems to agree that some kind of standards would be good, but
> not everybody agrees on the degree to which they are achievable.
>
> 2. There is a wide range of opinions on how important it is to have a
> "blessed" server-side UI framework for Sakai 3.
>
> 3. Of those people who believe a server-side UI framework is necessary,
> most of the preferences expressed so far have been for GWT, with one person
> raising Wicket as an alternative possibility.
>
> 4. The only specific concern expressed so far about having a server-side
> framework is its ability to support high and rising accessibility
> requirements.
>
> 5. There is significant interest in having a process to evaluate the pros
> and cons of various server-side frameworks.
>
> - m
>
>
> --
> Oracle
> Michael Feldstein | Principal Product Manager
> Phone: +1 8188172925 | Mobile: +1 9179218895
> Oracle Academic Enterprise Solutions
> 25 Christian Hill Road | Great Barrington, MA 01230
>
> Green Oracle     Oracle is committed to developing practices and products
> that help protect the environment
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael S Elledge [mailto:elledge at msu.edu]
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 10:20 AM
> To: markjnorton at earthlink.net
> Cc: sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org; Chambers, Sara J
> Subject: Re: [Building Sakai] [Management] Gradebook Situation
>
> I have to agree with Mark and Eli here. From an accessibility standpoint,
> client-side presentation is IMHO the way to go. We have yet to see a
> server-side solution that hasn't posed significant accessibility issues. It
> may seem old-fashioned to say this, but properly formed HTML with
> presentation by CSS and implementation by JavaScript still works best with
> screen readers. The potential for satisfying UI experiences has become much
> greater now that there are ARIA specs to make AJAX meaningful to
> screenreaders.
>
> Another point to consider--Wcag 2.0 sets a much higher bar than Wcag 1.0,
> which will make accessible server-side solutions even more difficult to
> achieve. Let's not tempt fate by bringing another JSF- like "solution" to
> Sakai--no one has time to customize tools that claim to be accessible--or
> render quality code--but do not.
>
> Mike
>
> On Jul 30, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Mark Norton <markjnorton at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> >  Attempts were made on two separate occasions in the past to create
> > technology standards for the Sakai community.  Mara Hancock and I
> > chaired one of those committees for a year each.  While a lot of work
> > was done to define tool standards, the community as a whole expressed
> > vast disinterest in either ratifying or adopting them.  When it became
> > clear that the Sakai community really didn't care about standards, I
> > disbanded the committee.
> >
> >> The contributing community is too finite to further divide
> > contributors by multiple tools at the same level in the architecture.
> >
> > While I understand the point you are trying to make, the opposite is
> > also true.  If you eliminate favored approaches to development,
> > especially UI technology, you will lose valuable contributors to the
> > Sakai community.  For example, if a guiding technology committee
> > decided to standardize Sakai on JSF at this point, I suspect you'd
> > lose half the developers, me included.
> >
> > To some extend, new standards are emerging out of the Sakai 3
> > development effort.  Ian Boston has expressed clear preferences for
> > certain approaches for Nakamura (next generation kernel).  That is a
> > far more effective way to get Sakai standards.  Not all agree with
> > Ian's choices and that's ok in large part because the reasons for
> > technology selection are well articulated and reasoned.  It is no
> > longer a matter of personal preference (which is what Sakai 2 devolved
> > into).  It is a choice to contribute ... or not.
> >
> > - Mark Norton
> >
> >
> > On 7/29/2010 3:28 PM, Chambers, Sara J wrote:
> >> I agree that we should have one sever side ui framework and one for
> >> the client side.  More importantly one standard toolset covering the
> >> entire application architecture (obviously S2 amd S3 will have
> >> differences). Seems we should articulate the pros and cons of each
> >> option and pull together a technical committee to make the selection.
> >> Actually IU would like to see a tech committee established to vet all
> >> technology decisions for Sakai and especially for S3 since that's our
> >> future.  The contributing community is too finite to further divide
> >> contributors by multiple tools at the same level in the architecture.
> >> I'm personally not opposed to client side and server side UI dev but
> >> believe we should have one agreed upon toolset for each.  IU is not a
> >> GWT shop but if the Sakai technology committee decided that was going
> >> to be the standard tool going forward for example, then we would come
> >> up to speed on it.  What we don't want to do is support multiple
> >> tools at each level and/or
> > be locked out of making local customizations because a tool or service
> > was developed in a "non-standard" toolset.  Just my .02
> >>
> >> Sara
> >> --------------------------
> >> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Device
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Michael Feldstein [mailto:michael.feldstein at oracle.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 01:48 PM
> >> To: markjnorton at earthlink.net<markjnorton at earthlink.net>
> >> Cc: Managers<management at collab.sakaiproject.org>;
> >> sakai2-tcc<sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> >> >; Sakai Developers<sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [Management] [Building Sakai]   Gradebook Situation
> >>
> >> Not for the principle UI framework, but for the principle *server-
> >> side* UI framework. Many of the participating Sakai 3 schools are
> >> moving toward client-side development, but not all. Of those that are
> >> not, the server-side framework I hear mentioned the most is GWT these
> >> days. I have no strong opinion (and certainly no expert
> >> opinion) on which server-side framework would be best, but just from
> >> a skillset management perspective, I think we do need to make
> >> allowances for shops that don't have strong client-side development
> >> skills to be able to contribute.
> >>
> >> - m
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =======
> > Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
> > (Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.15550)
> > http://www.pctools.com/ =======
> > _______________________________________________
> > sakai-dev mailing list
> > sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
> > http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
> >
> > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
> > sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org
> >  with a subject of "unsubscribe"
> >
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-dev mailing list
> sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
> sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of
> "unsubscribe"
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-dev mailing list
> sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
>
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
> sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org with a subject of
> "unsubscribe"
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-dev/attachments/20100730/379a12e4/attachment.html 