That's a real conundrum, either I can interpret it as a "Mystery Song," meaning it is still under wraps, or as "Status Quo," meaning it isn't changing....
And another possible interpretation is "vertigo" because of the amazing new features incoming... 
Nah, basically all the glossary display system (formats) has been modified (plugin structure) and now everyone can create their own formats. This is the main change. Other minor improvements (define if an entry is always editable by students...) and bugfixes will be included too...(I think).
Ciao
Nah, basically all the glossary display system (formats) has been modified (plugin structure) and now everyone can create their own formats. This is the main change. Other minor improvements (define if an entry is always editable by students...) and bugfixes will be included too...(I think).
Ciao
That's what Martin said in the chat yesterday but I was just unclear as to what was meant by "creating our own formats." Is it something along the lines of what Stephen Hennenberry and I were discussing a couple weeks ago?
Hi n,
I've been searching this course about your discussion with Stephen, but I haven't found it! Can you post here a reference or a summary about it? I missed such interesting discussion!
Ciao
PS: Very impressed about me saying what Martin said yesterday...
I missed it too!
I've been searching this course about your discussion with Stephen, but I haven't found it! Can you post here a reference or a summary about it? I missed such interesting discussion!
Ciao
PS: Very impressed about me saying what Martin said yesterday...
Sure, here's the link to our discussion:
http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=6451
Martin said it during the voice chat, that's why you missed it.
Martin said it during the voice chat, that's why you missed it.
Hi n, thanks for the link,
As I've read there are two different objectives in such discussion:
1.-Be able to define, by glossary, this words: concept, definition, category & author (are these all?). This isn't currently supported by the glossary module, but I could be done, sure. It'll allow more "specialised" glossaries, I think.
2.-Having additional (optional) fields to write specialised info, some of them linkable. Modifying the glossary to support this will imply a lot of changes in the whole system (db, link system, backup...). A workaround with the new "create your own formats" in Moodle 1.4 could be to "force" users to use a standard way to enter the info in the description field and then create a custom format able to display such info as you want. That format should be able to detect incorrect description fields, inform to the user... And for keywords about the entry, aliases must be used, I cannot imagine another solution.
Any comment?
Ciao
PS: For clarifying things, the new plugin formats feature only allows you to define new ways to display the glossary entries (it doesn't allow to modify the glossary or glossary-entry structure).
As I've read there are two different objectives in such discussion:
1.-Be able to define, by glossary, this words: concept, definition, category & author (are these all?). This isn't currently supported by the glossary module, but I could be done, sure. It'll allow more "specialised" glossaries, I think.
2.-Having additional (optional) fields to write specialised info, some of them linkable. Modifying the glossary to support this will imply a lot of changes in the whole system (db, link system, backup...). A workaround with the new "create your own formats" in Moodle 1.4 could be to "force" users to use a standard way to enter the info in the description field and then create a custom format able to display such info as you want. That format should be able to detect incorrect description fields, inform to the user... And for keywords about the entry, aliases must be used, I cannot imagine another solution.
Any comment?
Ciao
PS: For clarifying things, the new plugin formats feature only allows you to define new ways to display the glossary entries (it doesn't allow to modify the glossary or glossary-entry structure).
As Stephen pointed out, a workaround would be to change the language pack on a course-by-course level but this still would allow only one type of glossary per course. If we were able to define our own terms for what these various things are called on a per-glossary level, then for example a history teacher could create a glossary of famous people, as well as glossary of historical events, and the descriptive terms for each would be appropriate for each. The reason one would want to be able to change the author field is simply if one is using the glossary for books. It is confusing. But that might be solved simply by changing the term "author" to a simple "submitted by" or even "by" like we have here in the forums to be consistent on a wider course level (eek, now the fact that I have spent the past three years editing databases for consistency to the most nit-picky details is starting to show).
The other thing that would be nice as Stephen pointed out would be to add another field for another category of information (e.g. a biology teacher wanting to create a glossary that could at least include two "concepts," scientific name and common name). Sorting by both fields would be nice, if possible. Linking by these fields to me wouldn't be necessary, as I would probably want to use the additional field for some sort of subsidary information. It could be a really neat thing but understandably would be a very complex one and one that might have issues with the speed of the filtering.
The other thing that would be nice as Stephen pointed out would be to add another field for another category of information (e.g. a biology teacher wanting to create a glossary that could at least include two "concepts," scientific name and common name). Sorting by both fields would be nice, if possible. Linking by these fields to me wouldn't be necessary, as I would probably want to use the additional field for some sort of subsidary information. It could be a really neat thing but understandably would be a very complex one and one that might have issues with the speed of the filtering.