<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>digital digs - Latest Comments in imagining the online composition platform</title><link>http://digitaldigs.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://digitaldigs.disqus.com/imagining_the_online_composition_platform/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:52:26 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: imagining the online composition platform</title><link>http://www.alex-reid.net/2009/11/imagining-the-online-composition-platform.html#comment-848000798</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I like where you're taking this idea in your last couple of posts. Along with the rapid rise of MOOCs, I've wondered why composition programs have not leveraged their numbers to create local-scaled versions. At the very least, these local versions (LOOCs?) could provide competition to what might be a formidable challenge from those global vendors in the future.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As you mention above, the platforms need to allow for a host of genres, and I would stress that those genre need also include lists, collections, bibliographies.  These online environments might be some kind of mashup between Tumblr (modular but also connected, tag-able across the the entire site) and one of the bibliographic type platforms (Zotero, Diigo, Delecious, etc).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In any case, just a few thoughts.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Guest</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:52:26 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>