[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Re: Signinig up, versions, passing UMOs [was: Passing UMOs]
Alexey Parshin wrote:
> This approach means, that if several courses include each different
> versions of the same UMO, then to pass these courses one should study
> all the versions of the UMOs mentioned,
It does.
> and that is simply not fair.
Life isn't fair.
> This requires enormous waste of time for no particular reason,
> especially if differences between versions are minor.
You forgot about "minor edit" concept - if changes are minor, no new
version is created.
> It would make more sense if the UMO is considered as passed regardless
> of version.
a. Not always. b. makes our system inconsistent in some cases.
>
> 2007/1/6, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh <ilya@total-knowledge.com
> <mailto:ilya@total-knowledge.com>>:
>
> It's not a downside.
>
> sergey@total-knowledge.com <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com> wrote:
> > There is one downside I see at this point.
> > UU is going to have bunch of UMOs in the Repository that do not
> belong to
> > any course. Imagine a situation when student finds a topic, a
> test or a
> > problem in Repository, but will not be able to study it because
> he cannot
> > sign up for it directly.
> >
> >
> >> Little clarification:
> >> Student can only _directly_ sign up for a course. All other
> UMOs are
> >> signed up for indirectly.
> >> Which just made me realize how things should be:
> >> 1. Student can sign up to different versions of a course
> (provided he
> >> has rights for that - more on this later)
> >> 2. At the time student signs up for a course, he automatically
> signs
> >> up for all all objects of that course, to versions that are
> specified in
> >> the course at that time. IOW, a snapshot of a course is taken.
> >> 3. While student is studying, he will not see _any_ changes to the
> >> course. IOW, retrieving version of an object to study will be
> based
> >> on information in sign-up tables.
> >> 4. If there is an UMO of exact same version that student already
> >> studied, he will not be able to "study" it again - his results from
> >> previous
> >> passage of this UMO will carry over. Otherwise he will have to
> pass it
> >> again.
> >>
> >> Now, what we need is to adjust database schema to allow all of this
> >> (I think some info on signing-up is missing right now, but I'll
> let
> >> Alexey look into it himself).
> >>
> >> sergey@total-knowledge.com <mailto:sergey@total-knowledge.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Alexey Parshin wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> If an author is really interested to see the difference -
> then he can
> >>>>> simply see the difference between old rating (before new
> version) and
> >>>>> after. For instance, the rating was 4.5 and became 4.7 with
> the new
> >>>>> version..
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> True.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> After all, people who passed that UMO can't vote for another
> version
> >>>>> because it requires 'em to pass that version again. BTW,
> this also
> >>>>> means that students can only pass the UMO once regardless of
> version..
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Did you notice circular dependency in these two sentences?
> >>>> I am not sure whether we want to allow same student to pass
> different
> >>>> versions of same UMO or not.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Imho if Student wants to study new version of UMO, he will have to
> >>> sign-up
> >>> for it again. And I think he should be able to submit a vote
> on new
> >>> version too.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> >>>> Total Knowledge. CTO
> >>>> http://www.total-knowledge.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> >> Total Knowledge. CTO
> >> http://www.total-knowledge.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> Total Knowledge. CTO
> http://www.total-knowledge.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Parshin,
> http://www.sptk.net
--
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
Total Knowledge. CTO
http://www.total-knowledge.com