Talk:Building Automation/Guidelines

Subpages
While I agree that 'Fine tuning PID controllers' is unlikely to have a conflict with another main page, it's also unlikely to ever have enough content to be a full course. A page with this title would quickly be moved under whatever learning project links to it. The best approach is to use subpages to organize all content, unless that content rises to the level of a full learning project itself. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 03:48, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I guess you haven't tried fine tuning PID controllers. There are books on the subject and could well be an advanced course.
 * But the point was that other projects may want to share that page and may not want nor need to see it as a subpage of this project. Marcelo Acosta


 * You're right. I haven't tried to fine-tune a PID controller.  I've written code to drive and read them, but not tune them.  If I was writing a course about it, the title would be PID Controllers, and Fine Tuning would be a subpage of the PID Controllers learning project.  -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:32, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Cost
Wikiversity's focus is on open content, with the intent to 'Set learning free'. Providing promotional links to external for-profit organizations is problematic, particularly when the primary author has yet to disclose any affiliations or other conflicts of interest. -- Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 22:13, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Hmmm... this will be problematic. There aren't enough free learning resources to create a full training program for Building Automation Professionals. As stated in the Building Automation/History page, the intent of this project is not creating new material from scratch, but rather point to sources of training.
 * ASHRAE created a few loose courses on specific topics, (which you just deleted) but there are many courses missing. If Harper College had relevant courses I'd love to know. That's what we are trying to address: let people know (and let them tell us) which subjects they need to know and where they can be learnt, not provide a self contained "Here is everything you need to know". Marcelo Acosta


 * I'm totally in agreement on pointing to sources of learning. If you take a look at some of the courses I've developed, you'll see that's the design I use.  See IT Fundamentals for the most recent addition.  But none of the linked content has an associated cost, and only the occasional link even requires authentication.  When resources have a cost, they are listed generically, allowing users to select their own vendor.  For example, books are listed by ISBN only, allowing the user to click and chose from a variety of book vendors, their choice.
 * Also note that there are no references to the equivalent Harper College course. Because Harper courses are not free, they are not listed.  The alternative would be promotional, and worse-yet, self-promotional in this case, because I get paid for teaching those courses.
 * What resources can you add that do not appear to be promoting any particular vendor or service?
 * Dave Braunschweig (discuss • contribs) 02:32, 18 June 2015 (UTC)