<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/9/11 Andreas Tille <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andreas@an3as.eu" target="_blank">andreas@an3as.eu</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi Miriam,<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Hi! Thanks for your comments :)</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
as I said I like your idea of age based debtags but it seems there is<br>
not so much response. I admit I do not feel really competent here but<br>
its a shame to leave you alone with a good idea.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yup, I wonder why, if no one is interested, or if they feel it's not a good idea. I'll keep working on it at my pace, though. </div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 11:00:23PM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote:<br>
> The first thing I would like to do is to classify the games that might be<br>
> appropriate for kids of different ages, and based on that build the rest.<br>
<br>
</div>I think you should not "serialise" your plan that way. If you really<br>
want to get this DebTags idea as "first thing" done and the support<br>
would remain that way you might end up in a dead-end street.<br>
<div class="im"><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Currently debtags are powerful enough to extract lists from the archive and work from there, so I think it would be a good way to automatize things.</div>
<div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
> Of course there are many different criteria for doing that, some objective,<br>
</div>> some subjective. ...<br>
<br>
As I said I I feel incompetent here but I would not try to apply<br>
scientific criteria to strictly here. It seems different systems agreed<br>
about four age groups with just different names and some slight<br>
difference in the age. Since we are definitely not able to make the<br>
distinction of age in our target packages / programs that sharp IMHO it<br>
does not matter a lot what system we choose.<br>
<div class="im"><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yup. the problem here is that if we're dealing with developmental or physiological objective classification, that classification can be reasonably assumed to apply to kids throughout different cultures, whereas if we are also dealing with moral classification (violence, nudity, religion, profanity, whatever), that would not only depend on the culture, but also on the parent's values.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
> Somehow it seems that a good level of granularity might be 3 years, with<br>
> some approximate boundaries at 2/3, 6, 9, and 11/12 years. So my initial<br>
> idea is to define a set of tags with some name I can't currently figure out<br>
> year, that would be like:<br>
> A) An average baby of 3 years old could use the program according to their<br>
> cognitive, sensimotor and psychosocial stage of development.<br>
> B) An average child of 6 years old could use the program according to their<br>
> cognitive, sensimotor and psychosocial stage of development.<br>
> C) An average kid of 9 years old could use the program according to their<br>
> cognitive, sensimotor and psychosocial stage of development.<br>
> D) An average pre-teen of 12 years old could use the program according to<br>
> their cognitive, sensimotor and psychosocial stage of development.<br>
<br>
</div>Sounds reasonable.<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> The best thing about such a simple system is that it's quite easy to know,<br>
> whoever has kids around know which programs they are able to manage, in<br>
> both aspects of cognitive development ("the way they think"), sensorimotor<br>
> development ("how complex and quick the managing of the program might be"),<br>
> etc.<br>
<br>
</div>Yes, please keep the system pretty simple.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, that's why I thought omething like this could work, and I still do. </div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br>
> One thing I would like to decide is whether an objective classification of<br>
> this kind should be generic enough (and be allowed to, and under which<br>
> conditons) to be put into the standard debtag set (other tags, mostly<br>
> subjective or culturally dependent ones should have to go into their own<br>
> package), which will definitely bring a lot of benefits.<br>
<br>
</div>I have the gut feeling that this could work out somehow.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I would like some input from Enrico or from people from the debtags mailing list too, to see what they might think about this, and if there's a possibility to make it work. That's essentially one of the things I was hoping as a feedback to my original email.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Greetings and thanks,</div><div>Miry</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>