Talk:Taxonomy - Revision history

Walter: moved from main page

2008-05-24T18:39:06Z

moved from main page

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 24 May 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
			==Initial motivation for the Taxonomy page==
			Benjamin M. Schwartz has proposed a taxonomy for the various Sugar components to remedy an ongoing naming problem.

			"I think Sugar has a naming problem. There are a lot of different digital
			objects being produced by this project, and referring to all of them as
			Sugar is becoming increasingly confusing. For example, the discussion
			about "Sugar on Windows" has been all but incomprehensible, because each
			author means something entirely different by the term "Sugar". Similarly,
			the recent proposals for "inclusion in Sugar" are extremely confusing,
			since these components will not be required to run Sugar.

			"To resolve this, I am going to attempt to list a number of important,
			distinct digital objects that this work has produced. I will also
			introduce cutesy codenames. I hope that the Sugar developers will adopt a
			clear set of distinct names, and I do not care if they choose these names
			or other names."

	==Operating System and Sugar stacking==		==Operating System and Sugar stacking==

Cjl: /* Sugar is bad for you */ new section

2008-05-18T01:41:58Z

Sugar is bad for you: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:41, 17 May 2008
Line 17:		Line 17:

	: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-XO images. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]		: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-XO images. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]

			== Sugar is bad for you ==

			If you're going to open up the whole "Sugar" nomenclature to comment, I might as well drop in a thought that has been on my mind since I started following OLPC. Sugar is simply an unfortunate name choice in the first place. Don't get me wrong, I think the concept of the UI and pedagological thought are just peachy, but the name "sugar" is just awful on so many levels.

			My primary concern is that the cross-cultural facility of the graphical UI paradigm is overshadowed by the fact that the selection of "sugar" as a name falls so terribly short-of-the-mark with respect to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_competence cultural competence].

			:Cultural competence refers to an ability to interact effectively with people of different cultures. Cultural competence is comprised of four components: (a) Awareness of one's own cultural worldview, (b) Attitude towards cultural differences, (c) Knowledge of different cultural practices and worldviews, and (d) cross-cultural Skills. Developing cultural competence results in an ability to understand, communicate with, and effectively interact with people across cultures.

			::See also [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercultural_competence Intercultural competence] for some interesting examples, particularly the Brazilian translation of the American/European "A-OK" gesture.

			Please bear with me while I provide some examples of why "sugar" is such a bad name. If one is the type to argue that '''oil''' is the one commodity that most typifies what is wrong with Western (particularly American) interaction with the rest of the world in the 20th and early 21st century, than one would also be inclined to argue that '''sugar''' was that commodity in the 17th through 19th centuries and that the social evils wrought by the economics of sugar are still very much with us today.

			The historical role of sugar in driving the slave trade is well enough known. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_trade][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Brazil] That the sugar industry has an appalling human rights record that continues to this day in locations all over the world is perhaps less appreciated by some. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batey_%28sugar_workers%27_town%29][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Price_of_Sugar]. In Haiti, they still remember the American occupation from 1915-1934. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_American_Sugar_Company] The sugar industry's sponsorship of soccer teams in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Premier_League Ethiopia] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanzanian_Premier_League Tanzania] notwithstanding, I can't imagine that the modern sugar producers have much better records except where there are cooperatives. Even within the United States, sugar is not so sweet, being associated with massacres and corporate malfeasance [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanapepe_massacre][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._E._C._Knight_Co.][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sugar_Point].

			It's also very confusing in computer-related namespace with multiple conflicting and confusing uses [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugarcrm][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Games][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUGAR_%28MEMS_Simulator%29][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntactic_sugar]

			You might argue that the name Sugar has gained too much currency for a re-branding. I'll point out that [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_%28GUI%29 Sugar (GUI)] doesn't rate a disambiguation page or or even a mention on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar Wikipedia's Sugar page].

			On the other hand, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honey Honey] seems to have warmer multi-cultural associations.

			:No insult meant to the Sugar developers, whose work speaks for itself, but why let the name send the wrong message. "Sugar" just leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

			[[User:Cjl\|Cjl]] 01:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Marcopg: /* Operating System and Sugar stacking */

2008-05-17T13:51:34Z

Operating System and Sugar stacking

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:51, 17 May 2008
Line 16:		Line 16:
	Ludovic F		Ludovic F

	: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-~~OLPC~~ images. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]		: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-XO images. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]

Marcopg: /* Operating System and Sugar stacking */

2008-05-17T13:51:07Z

Operating System and Sugar stacking

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:51, 17 May 2008
Line 15:		Line 15:

	Ludovic F		Ludovic F

			: I think we should make Ribose definition more generic. There will other distribution channels in the future like livecds and perhaps non-OLPC images. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]

Marcopg: /* Operating System and Sugar stacking */

2008-05-17T13:48:48Z

Operating System and Sugar stacking

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:48, 17 May 2008
Line 15:		Line 15:

	Ludovic F		Ludovic F

	: Yeah, I'm not fully convinced about Ribose either. I guess it could be considered like a generic name for the various Sugar live cds and images which will be produced. I guess we need to define our distribution channels more specifically and then we re-evaluate naming. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]

Marcopg at 13:42, 17 May 2008

2008-05-17T13:42:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:42, 17 May 2008
Line 15:		Line 15:

	Ludovic F		Ludovic F

			: Yeah, I'm not fully convinced about Ribose either. I guess it could be considered like a generic name for the various Sugar live cds and images which will be produced. I guess we need to define our distribution channels more specifically and then we re-evaluate naming. -- [[User:Marcopg\|Marcopg]]

84.103.32.236: /* Operating System and Sugar stacking */

2008-05-17T12:39:19Z

Operating System and Sugar stacking

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:39, 17 May 2008
Line 13:		Line 13:

	In fact part of the stack is defined as a 'Sugar environment, ready to be installed through a package manager' in other sections of the document, clearly making these elements platform agnostic [see: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy#Sucrose:_The_interface.2C_plus_a_set_of_demonstration_activities].		In fact part of the stack is defined as a 'Sugar environment, ready to be installed through a package manager' in other sections of the document, clearly making these elements platform agnostic [see: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy#Sucrose:_The_interface.2C_plus_a_set_of_demonstration_activities].

			Ludovic F

84.103.32.236: New page: ==Operating System and Sugar stacking== The block diagram contains Ribose as part of the operating system, whilst it is defined as: > Ribose is the set of hardware-centric software compo...

2008-05-17T12:39:06Z

New page: ==Operating System and Sugar stacking== The block diagram contains Ribose as part of the operating system, whilst it is defined as: > Ribose is the set of hardware-centric software compo...

New page

==Operating System and Sugar stacking==

The block diagram contains Ribose as part of the operating system, whilst it is defined as:

> Ribose is the set of hardware-centric software components that have been developed<br/>
> throughout this project. It includes the XO kernels, OHM, any init-script customizations,<br/>
> etc. Ribose should be construed as including all components necessary to boot the system,<br/>
> enough to install Glucose if it has not yet been installed<br/>

Why this discrepancy?

IMO the Ribose definition is XO orientated (biased?) and this would make the software stack more complex to understand if we have to define it based on the hardware it runs on.

In fact part of the stack is defined as a 'Sugar environment, ready to be installed through a package manager' in other sections of the document, clearly making these elements platform agnostic [see: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Taxonomy#Sucrose:_The_interface.2C_plus_a_set_of_demonstration_activities].