[Xerte-dev] Re: HTML5

Mon Apr 8 13:10:54 BST 2013

I'm sorry the issue with the messages persists. I did raise it with the systems people here, I will raise it again, because it is a major PITA.

If learners can choose, they can also choose badly…

leaving that aside for now, shall we do as you suggested then, and have a drop down in project properties setting a database flag?

We can still have the two URLs available, so learners can choose if they want to…

-----Original Message-----
From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Tom Reijnders
Sent: 08 April 2013 12:37
To: For Xerte technical developers
Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: HTML5

The major reason I dislike that idea, is that it limits my choices as an end-user.

Now I can never view a html5 LO with the flash engine.

I agree that in the next 6 - 12 months flash won't be any issue for XOT anymore, but why make users choose now.

I tend to try to get to a solution that gives the choice to the end user (and there are two of them, the creator, but also the learner) So.... I tend to try to give absolutely maximum flexibility to the publishers and the consumers.

1. Give the publishers the right to express their preference (flash or

html5)

2. Give the learners (at some cost) the  ability to choose differently.

I would be willing to help in implementing such a scheme.

Tom

P.S.

I am a bit frustrated in how the mailing list  handles these mails. The mails come in at absolute unpredictable order, and I got a reply on one of my own mails, but my own mail hasn't made it to the list yet. Very frustrating when we try to discuss these kinds of major issues.

Op 8-4-2013 12:02, Pat @ Pgogy schreef:

> Almost :)

>

> I think if we made a new Xerte HTML 5 module then we could offer a conversion tool to change the template type in the database. But we might be able to achieve the same by addin a html5 file to the project folder?

>

> So new module for html5 and the interesting concept for conversion -

> see twitter bootstrapping,

>

> Or

>

> Html5 stub file and some code changes

>

> Or

>

> Status quo

>

> Pgogy Webstuff - http://www.pgogywebstuff.com Makers of web things of

> a fair to middling quality

>

> On 8 Apr 2013, at 10:18, Tom Reijnders <reijnders at tor.nl<mailto:reijnders at tor.nl>> wrote:

>

>> Although I am not really a fan of database changes, I think in this

>> case it would make much sense to consider this: (as Pat also

>> mentioned if I understood him correctly)

>>

>> 1. Add a field to the templatedetails table indicating whether flash

>> or html5 is the default engine 2. Make all the existing links like

>> play, export, rss, etc. use this field to determine what engine to

>> use 3. Add this toggle to the properties page 4. Add explicit links

>> for html5 AND flash

>>

>> In the end, the current play would do the triage based on default values in the DB and capabilities of the requesting platform, and then call one of the explicit implementations.

>>

>> No code duplication, no confusion of what will happen in normal

>> circumstances, and total control to the user... :-)

>>

>> Tom

>>

>> Op 8-4-2013 10:59, Julian Tenney schreef:

>>> Reading this carefully backs up my instinct that LOs made in Flash, should continue to be delivered in Flash. The issues for conversion, as you say, are as likely to be aesthetic as anything else, and URLs out in the wild should continue to work as they always have done. We shouldn't change that to HTML5, and authors should always check content before re-distributing it as HTML5 content. We should leave the old URL in the properties panel so people don't get stuck unable to find the flash URL if that's what they need. In existing LOs, a LO property could force preview to the old flash version if required - or perhaps a new property on the LO icon could denote a 'new' LO and do preview as HTML5; in its absence preview as Flash (because it's old stuff). New stuff should default to HTML5.

>>>

>>> I'm very leery about making this complicated, because we'll end up making a big rod for our backs.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Ron

>>> Mitchell

>>> Sent: 04 April 2013 15:17

>>> To: 'For Xerte technical developers'

>>> Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: HTML5

>>>

>>> Sorry this is going to be a rather long reply but I think it's an extremely important topic. There's no right or wrong here but...

>>>

>>> We aren't just talking about new installations we're talking about lots of upgrades e.g. all existing organisations upgrading to 2.0. We surely shouldn't be saying only use version 2 as a new clean install?

>>>

>>> We also have a few to many model here e.g. the decisions and changes made by us and what is a tiny developer community compared with tools like Moodle benefits but also impacts many many more users and potentially thousands of individual learning objects and pages within those learning objects. It isn't realistic for all those users to re-check every single page within every single LO that they've created and shared previously. At least I'd say it's not in our interests to force them to have to do that.

>>>

>>> It isn't just a case of technical compatibility with HTML 5. Fay and everyone else involved here has done a great job with the conversions and latest developments etc but I know from my own LO's and from what other users have said even where page types are available for both already, each LO and each page needs checking before changing the shared or embedded link to the html 5 version. I know html 5 is the future and offers lots of benefits but in many cases for existing LO's there would still be a preference to share the Flash link as the default and an alternative link to the html 5 version for mobile consumption. In many cases those LO's will be embedded in VLE pages and lots of different places and over time tested and refined etc for Flash based delivery including colour schemes and other customisations which wouldn't work or apply via HTML 5.

>>>

>>> By only having a single play.php and other links defaulting to html 5 even for existing LO's we risk adversely affecting thousands of existing LO's and in some cases breaking them. I'll share a simple example below after a few more points.

>>>

>>> There's lots more to unpick here and I'm not sure email/mailing list is the best format to discuss all this so perhaps a scheduled online meeting would be a good idea? In my opinion we need to try to differentiate between existing LO's and newly created LO's in version 2 without introducing a barrier to upgrading. I wonder if there's a way to achieve both by introducing a way to treat new LO's differently by default compared with existing LO's ideally under author control for each LO?

>>>

>>> e.g. in an install upgraded to version 2 For existing LO's play.php and related links play the Flash version by default For new LO's play.php and related links play the HTML 5 version by default For all LO's there's an optional property that the author can set to determine whether HTML 5 or Flash is the default So this isn't auto-detection based on browser or device etc but is under author control to change defaults. If there's also a method of doing index.php?format=flash then fine too but I have real concern about the scenario that we haven't had so far where changing play.php to default to html 5 for existing LO's in an upgraded install could alter or even break all that existing content or at least some pages within each LO.

>>>

>>> Here's a simple example/scenario...

>>>

>>> Let's say Nottingham upgraded their existing install to version 2 where play.php now defaults all LO's including existing LO's to HTML 5 How many users, LO's and individual pages would that involve checking?

>>> I really like the range of LO's with very visual title pages that

>>> Julianhas shared previously via the mailing lists etc e.g.

>>> http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_81

>>> Compare that Flash view with the HTML 5 version

>>> http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_html5.php?template_id=81

>>> Layout certainly changes

>>> Some browsers e.g. Chrome and Safari on iPad don't show the title page images (not sure why that is?) Page 2 has very different font size via Flash and HTML 5 - not broken but arguably not a desirable change Page 4 appears empty via HTML 5 - so arguably broken I know some of these issue may be fixable but how realistic is that for all existing LO's? In any case it may take a long time to find and fix every issue like this.

>>>

>>> So just in this one example there would be a lot to check and remedy if HTML 5 is forced for existing LO's. I know it's not just about play.php and may involve jumping through hoops just to avoid causing these sorts of problems but that few to many relationship says it all I think?

>>>

>>> Just a few thoughts.

>>> Ron

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Fay

>>> Cross

>>> Sent: 04 April 2013 14:06

>>> To: For Xerte technical developers

>>> Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: HTML5

>>>

>>> I don't have a preference really as long as you can still have a link that will force you to the Flash version if that's what you want.  I think Julian was keen for links out there already to still show the same content though (e.g. www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_560<http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_560> to still go to the Flash version).  I might be wrong about that though - he's not here this week.

>>>

>>>

>>> John - it's textDrawing, chart, customHotspots and inventory that use the canvas tag so won't always fully work in older browsers.  There's already a fallback in there for if audio/video tags aren't supported - it will use Flash instead.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> -----Original Message-----

>>> From: xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of

>>> Smith, John

>>> Sent: 04 April 2013 13:52

>>> To: xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: HTML5

>>>

>>> I know i'm the new guy here but I agree with Pat.

>>>

>>> Most people will expect a considerable change from a major point upgrade and 2.0 was always considered the HTML5 release so i think we should make that the focus and the default...

>>>

>>> How about a single index.php file with a format parameter. Those still requiring flash can reroute the index and index_html5 to the opposites if required and when we have index.php?format=flash to force flash on if really required.

>>>

>>> What models only work in flash anyway now, other than the majority of the drawing model?

>>>

>>> The only other issue is IE6/7/8 fir mainly the audio/video tags but there are some good js libraries that will add in the html5 specific stuff and perhaps we should resort to using those.

>>>

>>> Regards

>>>

>>> John Smith

>>> Learning Technologist

>>> School of Health and Life Sciences

>>>

>>> Sent from Samsung Galaxy SII

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> "Pat @ Pgogy" <xerte at pgogywebstuff.com<mailto:xerte at pgogywebstuff.com>> wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>> Two works for play and peer, though someone will need to write peer

>>> html5 and so on

>>>

>>> It won't work for rss, syndicate - and it messes with the API ideas

>>>

>>> And a lot of other stuff - embed codes, links - will need to be duplicated and the difference explained?

>>>

>>> On 4 Apr 2013, at 10:05, Fay Cross <Fay.Cross at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Fay.Cross at nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Fay.Cross at nottingham.ac.uk%3cmailto:Fay.Cross at nottingham.ac.uk>>> wrote:

>>>

>>> Two.  Unless that will cause problems?

>>>

>>> From:

>>> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at li<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk%3cmailto:xerte-dev-bounces at li>

>>> sts.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Pat @

>>> Pgogy

>>> Sent: 04 April 2013 09:24

>>> To: For Xerte technical developers

>>> Subject: [Xerte-dev] Re: HTML5

>>>

>>> So are we going with the two urls or the one URL approach?

>>>

>>> Pgogy Webstuff -

>>> http://www.pgogywebstuff.com<http://www.pgogywebstuff.com/<http://www.pgogywebstuff.com%3chttp:/www.pgogywebstuff.com/>>

>>> Makers of web things of a fair to middling quality

>>>

>>> On 28 Mar 2013, at 15:04, Tom Reijnders <reijnders at tor.nl<mailto:reijnders at tor.nl<mailto:reijnders at tor.nl%3cmailto:reijnders at tor.nl>>> wrote:

>>>

>>> Op 28-3-2013 15:37, Julian Tenney schreef:

>>>

>>> Brilliant.

>>>

>>>

>>> 1.       Exporting seems to cause people a lot of problems, but I guess they do seem to use it (rightly or wrongly). I’d prefer to have options to export the various types of zip for either html5 or flash, I think. I have no idea how hard this is to do? I’d love to drop this functionality because it just seems to cause a lot of unnecessary problems, I’m not sure people really need to export content as much as they do – but there are some valid reasons to do it, so I suppose we’re stuck with it. Tom adapted the original exporting code, would this be something that is easy for Tom to look at? Or reassure me that I can adapt your code easily to use different paths / folders etc?

>>> I'll look into this. I need to anyways, because of SCORM.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> 2.       The play_html5_1234 is a good idea, yes, for consistency. On installs where this works, does the play_html5.php?template_id= work as well?

>>>

>>> yes the other URL will work as well.

>>>

>>>

>>> 3.       Yes, everything should default to the html5 output. Peer review needs a new URL as well. CTRL-Click can launch the flash version instead from the wizard. I’m not sure we need browser detection: people should use the URL they built it for; however, we should probably put something in place for older browsers to say ‘upgrade your browser’ or similar? I’m guessing the paths are easy to amend in the php?

>>>

>>> What else do we need to look at before we can release this? This morning we tentatively agreed to have it all ready for FRIDAY 26th APRIL. Do we need a list of open issues that need resolving before the release? I’m thinking of the Firefox security thing in particular, though it sounds like you’re getting close John? Also the thing with the buttons staying greyed out that appeared recently? If Tom’s SCORM work isn’t ready by then, I’m not sure it’s a big problem?

>>> No, I don't think SCORM is a show stopper (but I'll do my utmost!)

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> I’ve made a titanpad here for a list of things to do: http://titanpad.com/xottwopointoh. I want to concentrate on finishing existing work, rather than starting anything new just now, but please add any bugs to it as well, and we’ll fix as many as we can.

>>>

>>> An aside, is it worth starting to think about when / where we do another AGM? If we do it outside of teaching time, we can do it in rooms here at no cost. Maybe sometime in July?

>>>

>>> I’m off next week, but will have some time after that to help out

>>> with getting this finished, Julian

>>>

>>> From:

>>> xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at li<mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk%3cmailto:xerte-dev-bounces at li>

>>> sts.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> [mailto:xerte-dev-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Fay

>>> Cross

>>> Sent: 27 March 2013 17:17

>>> To: For Xerte technical developers

>>> Subject: [Xerte-dev] HTML5

>>>

>>> Hello all

>>>

>>> As you should know the HTML5 work is nearly complete and there are only a couple of page types for me to complete before we can release a new version of Toolkits with the HTML5 interface as the default view.  I have a few things that I could do with some help on before the release so if anyone can give me a hand with them or just give your opinions it would be much appreciated...

>>>

>>>

>>> 1.       Exporting HTML projects:

>>> The files that would need to be in the zip would be more or less the same as for the Flash version but using the common_html5 and models_html5 folders instead of common/models.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> 2.       Abbreviated link:

>>> Possibly something Ron can help with as I’ve noticed it’s working on his install.  Can abbreviated links be made to work e.g. www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_html5_560<http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_html5_560<http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_html5_560%3chttp:/www.nottingham.ac.uk/toolkits/play_html5_560>> rather than using the full url?

>>>

>>> (Apologies Pat, I think you partly answered this for me previously

>>> but I can’t find it)

>>>

>>>

>>> 3.       Play / Preview links:

>>>

>>> a.       Links in project properties, preview button in workspace and preview in wizard need to be updated to go to the HTML5 version.

>>>

>>> b.      In the wizard should Ctrl-Click bring up the Flash version when clicking normally is changed to HTML5?

>>>

>>> c.       Do you think there needs to be some browser detection that decides which version people see?  The problem I can see with this is that if we start adding new features or pages to the HTML5 version then by sending them to the Flash version instead they may miss out on some content.  Not many of the page types in the HTML5 version actually use HTML5 tags if that makes sense – probably just the handful where the canvas tag is used (textDrawing, charts etc.) so there might not be many instances where there will be problems if you’re on an older browser anyway.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> 4.       Page models:

>>>

>>> a.       John – is the flickr page finished?

>>>

>>> b.      Johnathan – I’ve emailed you off list about a few queries I’ve got with the connector pages, I hope this is ok – I didn’t want to bother everyone else with them

>>>

>>> c.       SCORM – this isn’t working at the moment but I can’t quite remember what’s missing.  I’ll email with more details of what help I might need when I’ve looked back at it

>>>

>>> Thanks

>>> Fay

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>>

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>>

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.a<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk%3cmailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.a>

>>> c.uk>

>>>

>>> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> --

>>>

>>> --

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Tom Reijnders

>>>

>>> TOR Informatica

>>>

>>> Chopinlaan 27

>>>

>>> 5242HM Rosmalen

>>>

>>> Tel: 073 5226191

>>>

>>> Fax: 073 5226196

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.a<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk%3cmailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.a>

>>> c.uk> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.a<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk%3cmailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.a>

>>> c.uk> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Glasgow Caledonian University is a registered Scottish charity,

>>> number SC021474

>>>

>>> Winner: Times Higher Education’s Widening Participation Initiative of the Year 2009 and Herald Society’s Education Initiative of the Year 2009.

>>> http://www.gcu.ac.uk/newsevents/news/bycategory/theuniversity/1/name

>>> ,6219,en.html

>>>

>>> Winner: Times Higher Education’s Outstanding Support for Early Career Researchers of the Year 2010, GCU as a lead with Universities Scotland partners.

>>> http://www.gcu.ac.uk/newsevents/news/bycategory/theuniversity/1/name

>>> ,15691,en.html _______________________________________________

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>>> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>> --

>> --

>>

>> Tom Reijnders

>> TOR Informatica

>> Chopinlaan 27

>> 5242HM Rosmalen

>> Tel: 073 5226191

>> Fax: 073 5226196

>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> Xerte-dev mailing list

>> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

>> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

> _______________________________________________

> Xerte-dev mailing list

> Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev

>

--

--

Tom Reijnders

TOR Informatica

Chopinlaan 27

5242HM Rosmalen

Tel: 073 5226191

Fax: 073 5226196

_______________________________________________

Xerte-dev mailing list

Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:Xerte-dev at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>

http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/xerte-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/pipermail/xerte-dev/attachments/20130408/216bca69/attachment-0001.html>