Forum OpenACS Q&A: Re: Some Feedback From an OpenACS Newbie

Posted by xx xx on
about the relationship between .LRN and OpenACS:

Nowadays we call openACS "The Toolkit for Online Communities". IMO that's a very basic feature so I like it.

However, the flexibility of the toolkit allows grouping and segmenting of the (registered) users in many ways. Currently, it's unclear to me what will be the supported way of creating communities (and corresponding permissioning) in the future. Wil it be 'Randy's' way (, the 'profiled groups' that dotlrn_users are, the 'communities/classes/departments/terms' way of grouping, a combination, or some other way. Will .WRK introduce a new system?

I think we need a statement that tells us how the 'Online Communities' are similar between openACS and dotLRN. When creating a new package that interacts with groups we need to know. If I missed it somehow please point this ignorant man to the right place.

Posted by Carl Robert Blesius on

I can answer you question about .LRN.

Long term we want the groups in .LRN to be created in the most OpenACS conform way possible so that will be used by as many people as possible (e.g. the .WRK group). This way any work needed to clean up the UI will benefit OpenACS in general and it keeps .LRN lean and mean.

We want to keep .LRN as thin of a layer on top of OpenACS as possible, sharing as much foundation with the greater community as possible. As Al mentioned we are working hard at cleaning up the presentation of this kind of information and plan to publish it soon.