Version 1.0 Issue Tracker

The purpose of the Version 1.0 issue tracker is to list all of the issues that were placed in the tracker through the development of Version 1.0. Issues affecting a single page can be found on the corresponding Talk page. Some suggestions derived from the issue tracker were placed as future edition suggestions.

Check Licensing of Repositories

Submitter: - Kim 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments:

I looked through the repositories a few months ago. It is somewhat difficult as some repositories are not very forthcoming about their licensing. Also, the possibility of errors when going through some many documents.

Would it help to have a list somewhere? (checked and correctly placed)? (Ktucker)
I think right here would work for any problematic listings. I don't think there are that many listed incorrectly. --Sgurell 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• HEAL (under Science Repositories) - "Various." Moved --Sgurell 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
• Athabasca University - Open University in Canada (under All rights reserved repositories - Check (not moved yet). I don't see anything that indicates open licensing (open access, but not open licensing). --Sgurell 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
• Jorum (currently listed under "All rights reserved" although they are transitioning to CC licensing) Proper placement? --Sgurell 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Jorum remains in Traditionally Copyrighted repository section as well as Athabasca University. HEAL, as mentioned above, was moved.

---

Stating Prices

Submitter: - Ktucker 16:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments:

(e.g.)

Prices change. Tricky as terms like "inexpensive" are relative. May be better not to state prices?

That's a great point. But I do wonder if the average educator is going to wonder "How much will it cost for me to do it myself?" --Sgurell 23:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Removed the word "inexpensive" from self-publishing section, but price point mentioned in third-party publishing remains in Version 1.0 with a note that costs vary. Issue closed. --Sgurell 16:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Unify Accessibility headings

Submitter: Ktucker/Sgurell
Date Completed:
Comments:

Currently headings are inconsistent.

Just "Accessibility" should suffice - ok? Ktucker 03:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Just "Accessibility" used for each chapter. Issue closed. --Sgurell 16:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Merge File Format Sections

Submitter: Ktucker 14:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments:

As suggested here - alternative version ready to paste.

Changes adopted with some minor tweaks. Issue closed. --Sgurell 16:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

User Stories

Submitter: Ktucker 23:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments:

There are so many great contributions! Do we include all of them? If so, do we categorise them somehow? (actual stories, tips, ...). Also, should we eliminate "User?" --Sgurell 15:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I've changed the name of each section to "perspectives." --Sgurell 18:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Issue closed? --Sgurell 04:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

"Perspectives" is good - move when changes made Ktucker 03:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Added thoughts to future edition suggestions page. --Sgurell 16:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Name for All Rights Reserved repository

Submitter: Ktucker/Sgurell
Date Submitted: 25 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments:

Ktucker raised this issue, citing the problem with implying open licenses don't have rights. Suggested "permission" or "restricted access." Sgurell recommends "full copyright" or "traditional copyright." Term agreed upon should be fairly short to accommodate titles and minimal disruption of paragraphs that mention it.

Restricted Use Repositories Ktucker 01:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Traditionally Copyrighted repositories chosen for Version 1.0, though this may change in Version 2.0. --Sgurell 15:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Difference between Composing and Adapting OER

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 16 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Based on discussion between Ktucker and Sgurell some thought needs to go into the proper placement of subsections between the two.

Some thought and more with links to comments on overall structure ... Kim 22:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Some sections have been moved around based on discussion. Issue closed? --Sgurell 18:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

As a last suggestion on this issue: Please consider - Kim 17:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

For next edition ...

The two chapters have largely remained the same, though future contributors should examine Ktucker's suggestions. Issue closed for now. --Sgurell 16:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Educator and Learner Based OER

Submitter: Ktucker 16:21, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments:

Check continuity: the last part of this page has changed considerably. Previous page referred to "lecturer" and "learner" perspectives.

I've changed the "Use" section to Educator/learner perspective. I've suggested doing away with the subsection entirely. --Sgurell 21:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

David felt the subsection should remain in Version 1.0. Issue closed. --Sgurell 16:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Adjust headings in Use OER section

Submitter: Sgurell/Ktucker
Date Submitted: 10 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: See also Style guide for the project

Issue closed. --Sgurell 16:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Revisit Evaluation in Use OER section

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 7 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments:

Recall that one of the life cycle diagrams suggests "quality" as a cross-cutting concern.

Merge this with the Quality sections? (under compose and adapt) - See: alternative merged Quality section and discussion.

Perhaps for this edition just add "See Also" sections in each page and cross-reference the other two. - Ktucker 21:12, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Added thoughts to future edition suggestions page. Issue closed. --Sgurell 16:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Add more on mlearning and blended learning

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 7 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments:

For first edition: added a short paragraph referring to MobilED.

Added some thoughts about mlearning to the future edition suggestions. --Sgurell 15:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Frame the Compose OER chapter around a specific case study.

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 7 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments:

As explained through e-mail, I'm not sure this issue is feasible, or at the very least, we need to consider how they would be presented and whether they can be ready by the end of the month. --Sgurell 22:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The idea was more general and converged to something like "design a set of exercises to guide the dedicated readers to resources relevant to a case study". The activities would be generic, illustrated with an example. The time issue may be a problem. But let's keep this open in case someone comes up with something (I have some ideas but will need dedicated time to write up). Ktucker 22:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Because of time issues, I don't know that we can incorporate it into this version of the handbook. Move to future suggestions page. --Sgurell 20:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Writeup on future edition suggestions page. Closed issue for the time being. --Sgurell 15:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Standard visual guidelines; images at 400px

Submitter: Mackiwg
Date Submitted: 12 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Mackiwg has submitted proposed guidelines on the Style guide.

Issue closed? --Sgurell 18:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Issue guidelines. --Sgurell 15:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Make sure educators understand value of OER to them

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 7 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Should affect introduction the most, and introductory sections of each chapter.

(Thread here)

Slight changes made throughout the handbook. I consider the issue closed, although it is something to pay attention to in future versions. I have also added some thoughts about it on the future edition suggestion page. --Sgurell 15:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Determine status of KEWL.NextGen development and documentation

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 8 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Need Ktucker's help closing this issue. --Sgurell 22:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

From an e-mail from Derek Keats:

Version 3 is currently in testing for release in July. It is already in use in a couple of institutions. It is fully Web 2.0 enabled.

My vote is to include it. Kim 07:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I've added KEWL.NextGen to the Learning Support Systems page. --Sgurell 22:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

and to add LeMill.

LeMill is tricky. It's marked as a repository in the Find chapter. I would suggest exclusion for two reasons 1) LeMill (to my knowledge) can't be downloaded for multiple instances, and 2) if LeMill is addded, then it follow that WikiEducator, Wikiversity, Wikipedia etc. would have to be added as well. --Sgurell 22:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Re 1): LeMill is FLOSS and can be downloaded and installed.

Re 2): It could go alongside Rhaptos. (The equivalent for WikiEducator and Wikiversity would be MediaWiki + extensions) - Ktucker 07:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Kewl.NextGen, LeMill and Rhaptos all added to Version 1.0. Issue closed. --Sgurell 15:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Issue: Glossary check

Submitter: Ktucker 22:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments: for new entries and entries not actually used in the educator handbook.

Words and abbreviations to add:

• CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, ...

I've added these licenses to the glossary. I wonder if defining each part alone ("CC," "BY," etc.) would be better. --Sgurell 04:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Issue closed. --Sgurell 15:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

License Ordering

Submitter: - Ktucker 20:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC) Date Completed:
Comments:

Least to most restrictive:

Suggest: PD CC-BY CC-BY-SA GFDL CC-BY-NC CC-BY-NC-SA CC-BY-NC-ND

(not the same as as a--Sgurell 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC) "pro-freedom" scale, but closer)

I've made some slight changes, but I feel that we did need to have a "Various" section. Also, CC-BY-ND may be more restrictive than CC-BY-NC-SA depending on what the educator needs. I think how I've outlined it currently is best. --Sgurell 21:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Closed issue. However, the arrangement of the licenses may change in version 2.0 --Sgurell 15:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Inconsistent terminology and references

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 23 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments:

Terminology and references outlined in style guide needs to be applied to handbook.

Assignments:

Sgurell
"OpenCourseWare"
References under "Sources" every page
US spelling of words
Change references to File Formats in the Find OER section

Ktucker
"GNU/Linux"
References to chapters
FOSS? OSS? See relevant discussion below FLOSS was chosen
alternate for "All Rights Reserved" (to be determined)

Mackiwg
"OER" only no "s" or " 's ".
References to sections within chapters
Visual guideline adherence

---

FOSS, FLOSS, OSS, open source, free software?

Submitter: Ktucker 16:21, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Date Completed:
Comments: Vote and decide ...

Vote taken. FLOSS appears to be the agreed upon term. Add to style guide and close the issue? --Sgurell 19:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes - but not move yet (until changes made) Kim 07:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Lifecycle or Life cycle?

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 23 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments:

Ideas?

life cycle seems preferable to most. - K 14:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I made changes to reflect, but may have missed a mention. Issue closed? --Sgurell 19:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: OER Lifecycle revision

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 4 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: May affect doc structure. See 1, 2, straw dog and [Rationale for ToC].

It seems to me we're almost there...it's just a matter of deciding whether we all agree on Compose OER (for Create OER). --Sgurell 17:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC).

I vote for "compose" --Wayne Mackintosh 18:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

me too (see also)-- Ktucker 21:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Change Introduction to be more encouraging

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 4 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Ktucker added text on 11 Jun. Issue closed? --Sgurell 15:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes Ktucker 22:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Add to Gonzalez-Barahona citation in Development Models

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 5 Jun.
Date Completed: 12 Jun. Comments: Added one more up-to-date source, used Cathedral and Bazaar citation.

---

Issue: Consistent level headings throughout the handbook

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 5 Jun.
Date Completed: 10 Jun.
Comments: See Style guide for the project Not sure if this is an issue for Wayne or Ktucker

---

Issue: Add note about Windows being a trademark in Development Models and ™ wherever Windows is mentioned

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 5 Jun.
Date Completed: 6 Jun.
Comments: Closed. May be others not found. Add if other mentions are found. Update: http://www.microsoft.com/library/toolbar/3.0/trademarks/en-us.mspx Windows is ® not ™

---

Issue: Add trademark to Mac OS X?

Submitter: Sgurell
Date Submitted: 6 Jun.
Date Completed: 12 Jun.
Comments: http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html . Mac OS is a ®. All known mentions of OS X have been marked, there may be others not caught.

---

Issue: Use of the word "You"

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 6 Jun.
Date Completed: 12 Jun.
Comments: Resolved. Use of "you" acceptable. Avoid pointed use of the word.

---

Issue: OER singular; OERs plural?

Submitter: Ktucker/Sgurell
Date Submitted: 10 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Recommend OER stand for "Open Educational Resources" and have usage follow that? Thoughts? I'm really flexible on this. --Sgurell 17:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC) See Style guide for the project.

Just edited out "OERs" and "OER's," per Kim's suggestion.

Issue closed? --Sgurell 18:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, we will still need to check in the "polishing" phase with reference to the style guide.

---

Issue: Consolidate all licensing info into one chapter and refer to it when needed in the other sections.

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 6 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: Wayne added text to paragraph. Does he disagree? Nope -- I don't agree or disagree. I see the need for a high level summary of the copyright issues up front without the detail. That said, I think we should create a new subsection for this chapter on the copyright paradox --Wayne Mackintosh 04:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Subsection has been created. Should we consider the issue closed? With the compromises made, can we consider the issue closed? --Sgurell 22:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The issue of having a consolidated Licensing chapter is closed Ktucker 21:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Add information to Preface about how to use the book

Submitter: Mackiwg
Date Submitted: 7 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: See Preface (straw dog) - My vote is to move this into the preface --Wayne Mackintosh 05:57, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Preface has been added. Issue closed? --Sgurell 22:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes Ktucker 21:55, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Issue: Move/blend text re Lecture-based, Student-based use into "Learning Design" (suggested rename for "Use").

Submitter: Ktucker
Date Submitted: 5 Jun.
Date Completed:
Comments: I'm OK with use in context of this handbook. Learning design is too broad, encompassing and a complex topic to deal with in a handbook. --Wayne Mackintosh 17:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, too broad and time factor.

This issue is closed but see related.

---

Issue: Move repository lists to Appendices?

Submitter: Ktucker (though some before that)
Date Submitted: 6 Jun.
Date Completed: 11 Jun.
Comments: Did not remove all, just All Rights Reserved.

---