Member
2007-09-19, 02:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by curt.clifton
Also, currently the full containment hierarchy of a project is maintained even as I check off actions. That is, if I filter for All Actions, I can see the original hierarchy. With your proposal for promoting the children, would that hierarchy be maintained? That is, do you see the promotion to just be a rendering issue or is it actually a change to the data structure? If it is really just a rendering issue, what happens when I decide I need to add a new prerequisite to an action? Now the data structure needs to reflect multiple parents for a single action.
|
I hadn't thought of this, but it seems clear that it's just rendering. I don't see the problem you are thinking about in your last two sentences. My structure doesn't allow for multiple parents, so that's something you could never do. (Current structure doesn't allow that either, I don't think.) |
Sure it does, with an additional group:
--> Parallel prereq group
----> Prereq 1
----> Prereq 2
--> Subsequent action
Or to use the naming scheme Pierre suggested above:
--> Parallel prereq group
----> A
----> B
----> C
--> Z
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by curt.clifton
Finally, Suppose I have a sequential project with 20 steps. (This isn't hypothetical; my daily course prep is approximately that.) In your proposal that would be 20 outline levels deep.
|
Yes, that might be a problem if the interface for the action hierarchy used indentation. But, it would only be a problem in some views (All, Remaining, maybe Completed). Second, I wonder if your actions are truly sequential, or if you have just chosen them to be so (due perhaps to current OF limitations?). Is your prep list similar to my example above? I'd be curious what the 20 sequential step prepartion really is, and if there aren't some parallel steps in it. |
Here it is. Fifteen sequential actions, one of which is an action group with 5 sequential actions inside it. I'm team teaching with 2 colleagues and we're developing the materials for a course that is designed to be taught in the future by anyone in the department. Synchronizing prep is vital.
- Create slides
- Write in-class quiz
- Develop in-class exercises
- Write HW
- Write written HW problems
- Write programming problems
- Set up Angel gradebook entries for HW problems and Angel quiz
- Add a software in the real world link
- Ask TA to do the HW
- From Delvin, daily Angel quiz, link to gradebook
- Add quiz question numbers to slides
- Update course schedule
- Move materials to Public folder
- Update Angel page
- Publish to web
- Print quiz for everyone
- Print slides, annotate with target times
- Identify assistant tasks
- Grade Session 3, week 3 quiz
- Post transcript of Session 1, week 4
Not included are several "Waiting For" items that I insert as I go based on whether colleagues are providing feedback in meetings or electronically. How would that be represented in your proposed system?
__________________
Cheers,
Curt