Freeform discussion

This is Darren's take from memory of potential requirements that came out of the discussion of creating freeform portfolios, which builds on the pilot work at LaGuardia:

• The ability to control page layout is supplied in LaGuardia's implementation through the Fck. This is a good interim solution, but it doesn't allow for the layouts uploaded by users or for more advanced aspects of layouts, such as the ability to specify the type of items that can/should be placed in a particular region of a page. Therefore, we either need to
  • Hack the Fck editor to add capabilities. This would require institutions that want to use this functionality to choose a special version of Fck as their rich text editor.
  • Improve the usability of the interface for adding HTML content to regions within a layout such that it is as usable as using Fck on its own and add the other features to layouts. (We need to look back as 2.1 requirements to retrieve these and decide which are important.)
• Improving the usability of the tool may mean finding parts of the interface design from the DePaul mockups to implement or use as the basic off a UI redesign. This doesn't necessarily mean a wholesale redesign right away or a full embrace of the mocked-up design.
• We want a way to provide scaffolding for a "freeform" portfolio in the form of a predefined set of pages and default contents, which can then be changed and extended by portfolio authors (students).
• There may be a way to provide both equivalent design flexibility as now exists and some scaffolding through the use of a form with its own XSL and a template rather through a freeform portfolio. (But, it might make linked within the content of a page to another impossible and wouldn't allow for specifying what type of item goes in which region of a layout unless Fck is hacked to do this.)
• The ability to tag pages in a portfolio with goals, offer feedback on them, and do evaluations of them would be great to have.