 |
 |
I would move your 2.2 and 2.3 (xpath query and help pop ups) up to the essential category. These are features I use all the time when teaching. Sent from my Honor Mobile -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: "student editor" feature set From: Piotr Bański To: [log in to unmask] CC: Just noting that I have added (my take at) the remarks that have been shared recently and hopefully made it easier to argue individual points by hard-setting their numbers. There is a section in the article where discussion can be had. Naturally, this is a wiki, so anyone is welcome to edit the page. Best regards, Piotr On 09/07/16 23:21, Martin Holmes wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On 2016-07-09 12:54 PM, Martin Mueller wrote: >> Free is always better in some ways, and it’s certainly cheaper. But >> let’s not forget that the cost of oXygen for a student is no more, >> and indeed less, than the cost of a textbook in Economics or Biology. >> You get what you pay for, and with oXygen the value for money is >> pretty good. Arguably better than for Economics textbooks, where you >> have to ask whether for the purposes of introducing the principles of >> Economics the latest copy of Mankiw, Krugman, or whoever really does >> more than a dog-eared copy of Samuelson’s first edition. > > When a student lays out $99 on a textbook, they usually get to recoup at > least 60% of it by selling on the textbook when they no longer need it; > or they can purchase a textbook second- or third-hand and save > substantially on the cost. When they purchase an academic software > license, they can't resell it, nor can they purchase a second-hand copy. > > But over and above the buy-in cost, I think most of us are considering > that a scenario in which it's easy and cost-free to run XML encoding > courses with Oxygen will not only make our lives much easier, but in the > end produce larger numbers of more enthusiastic encoders, many of whom > will go on to be regular Oxygen customers. That would be a win for > everyone. > > Cheers, > Martin > >> On 7/9/16, 2:09 PM, "TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion >> list on behalf of Martin Holmes" <[log in to unmask] on behalf >> of [log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> Hi Hugh, >> >> On 2016-07-09 12:51 AM, Hugh Cayless wrote: >>> Syntax highlighting is one of those things where (at least if >>> you're doing it right) it's trivial to add new languages once you >>> have one or two. The feature itself may be hard to implement, but a >>> new language just means adding a grammar for that language and a >>> mapping of tokens to styles/colors. >> >> Yes, I've done it myself a few times. But we were looking at ideas >> for things that could be removed from the standard version of Oxygen >> without negatively affecting its use for teaching XML encoding, but >> which would leave that version inadequate for serious use, so that >> hopefully the Oxygen team would feel confident that such a version >> wouldn't undermine their sales. Blocking the availability of syntax >> highlighting for non-XML languages seems like an obvious one. >> >>> There was an effort a few years back to build a web-based TEI >>> editor, but I believe it got thwarted by unforseen (and, to be >>> fair, unforseeable) personnel changes. There have been tremendous >>> advances in web scripting capabilities since then, so perhaps it >>> would be worth revisiting. Or, failing that, perhaps some >>> investment in developing plugins to make jEdit more usable with >>> TEI? I haven't used it in about a decade, but I don't remember its >>> plugin architecture being all that hard to work with... >> >> I think the dearth of really good web-based editors of any kind is >> an indication that this is really not a simple task at all; it may be >> much more practical than it used to be, but I doubt it's easy. >> >> Actually, there's a shortage of really good XML editors of any kind >> at all. That's why Oxygen is so precious. >> >> Cheers, Martin >> >>> Hugh >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 12:51 AM, Martin Holmes <[log in to unmask] >>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Piotr, >>> >>> I hadn't intended to exclude syntax highlighting for XML/XSLT, >>> just for other languages such as CSS or JS. We surely need it for >>> XML. >>> >>> Cheers, Martin >>> >>> On 2016-07-08 03:58 PM, Piotr Bański wrote: >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> I've summarized this sub-thread at >>> >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__wiki.tei-2Dc.org_index.php_Editor-5Ffor-5Fteaching-5FTEI-5F-2D-5Ffeatures&d=CwIFaQ&c=yHlS04HhBraes5BQ9ueu5zKhE7rtNXt_d012z2PA6ws&r=rG8zxOdssqSzDRz4x1GLlmLOW60xyVXydxwnJZpkxbk&m=f7cBFtDvP8n91DThMrDrnlBkyW60e1tq8G56vv5glD4&s=dbNOK_fZQfVEOXNKmK-ruJBukoenD-u-GyYvLmtsBY4&e= >>> >>> >>> >>> > (and I admit to some modifications of the original listing, notably >>> mentioning syntax highlighting, which seems on the one hand >>> absolutely helpful for new (and old) users of XML, and on the other >>> is relatively cheap to implement) >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Piotr >>> >>> >>> On 08/07/16 00:45, Piotr Bański wrote: >>> >>> Hey, we're getting somewhere... When thinking of features IN, I >>> also thought that some of us, when they hear "XSLT?", reply with >>> "XQuery!", but Saxon HE could handle both, so no problem there. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> P. >>> >>> On 07/07/16 23:51, Martin Holmes wrote: >>> >>> I think it would be helpful also to agree on a list of things that >>> _wouldn't_ be needed for a teaching edition. >>> >>> One simple line that could be drawn across the feature set would be >>> that none of the commercial tools (Saxon PE, Saxon EE) would be >>> available; that means no XSLT 3, for instance. >>> >>> I don't think you'd need the XSLT or XQuery debuggers; nor would >>> you need the database connectivity. >>> >>> The SVN client, the Tree Editor, and the Compare Files/Directories >>> tools could also be removed. >>> >>> Similarly, syntax highlighting and editing support for some file >>> types which are not XML-based could be removed (JavaScript, CSS, >>> JSON, etc.). >>> >>> In this way you'd arrive at something which would be utterly >>> useless for the likes of me, and quite frustrating for serious >>> users, but perfectly functional for teaching introductory XML >>> encoding classes over a few months. >>> >>> Cheers, Martin >>> >>> On 2016-07-07 02:28 PM, Pierazzo, Elena wrote: >>> >>> Hi Piotr, >>> >>> While we all know that these brilliant guys have to earn their >>> bread somehow, and so can't just spread freebies around, I wonder >>> how realistic it would be to put together a list of features for a >>> dumbed-down teaching version of oXygen. I am somewhat afraid that >>> it's not too realistic, because course profiles naturally vary >>> depending on the exact content and the level of the audience, and >>> maintaining a new version might incur new costs. >>> >>> >>> I was thinking along the same lines, actually… and having your >>> same reluctancies (great minds…). >>> >>> >>> Still, I spent a while writing and rewriting the previous >>> sentence, and cutting some parts of it, exactly because I can >>> imagine counterarguments to what I say above. Maybe it would be >>> worth our while to *try* to put together a list of features that >>> we'd like to have in such an editor, just to see if we could agree >>> on a single set of such features -- because if not, then we already >>> could see why there's no point in asking George and Co. for that. >>> >>> I have actually already discussed things a bit with George. I have >>> been teaching XML and TEI for about 15 years now (yes, I’m that >>> old) and when you teach to absolute beginners what is an element >>> and why the TEI is such a good idea, it is hard to ask them to >>> commit to buy an editor because they do not yet know if they going >>> to like working with the TEI or not. Furthermore, a 30 days trials >>> is not enough: before putting int $100, people would like to make >>> sure that that will constitute a good return. In my discussion >>> with George, he seemed partial to the idea that if someone is >>> organising a TEI-flavoured training and is a TEI member, they could >>> be able to offer a 2/3 months trial, which is incredibly generous >>> of theirs, and I think it could solve some of our issues, but not >>> all, not mine anyway. My problem, and Roberto's I think, is that we >>> are talking about courses within a university degree that on the >>> one hand tend to last longer than 30 days (or 60 days) and on the >>> other, in case of newly established realities or tight budgets, >>> they require us to convince our administrators that to pay $1k for >>> a class or a site licence is a good investment, which in many cases >>> is not the easiest thing to do. >>> >>> >>> And if we _could_ agree on a single feature set, then the ball >>> would move into the hands of Syncro Soft profilers, and they would >>> simply have to check if they see reasonable benefit there. After >>> all, the benefit would come not only from selling the teaching >>> licenses but also from the fact that students would use oXygen >>> during their training, and that is something that some might choose >>> not to ignore in their long-range calculations. Lots of question >>> marks there, but an agreed feature set comes first, as a >>> precondition to further speculations or calculations. And Elena has >>> just given us a seed for such a feature set. >>> >>> >>> In my experience of teaching, the features I absolutely need are: >>> >>> - multiplatform - validation with Relax NG - contextual >>> suggestions - XSLT 2 transformation - easy to use - free >>> >>> Desirable are: >>> >>> - xPath query - Inline documentation (i.e. the little pop-ups with >>> the definition of the element) - pre-set templates >>> >>> All other features are, in my opinion, for people that ha decided >>> that the TEI is a good thing and wants that for their work. In >>> these case, I think expecting them to buy the software is >>> reasonable. I like to remember how oXygen was the first software I >>> ever bought with my own money. >>> >>> Elena >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >>