Optional. Perhaps reccommend it for simple objects (e.g. where there is
only one component) and maybe content packages.
Having mandatory seems unworkable for many.
I think application/X-unknown is a bit of a kludge, and is really just
another way of making filling in the real MIME type optional. Having said
that, it's an option I could live with if someone has a strong case for
keeping it.
Phil.
> Lorna Campbell wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I was off on Friday when most of this debate was taking place and as
>> usual you've given me plenty of food for thought. This is the second
>> long debate we've had about this particular element in the last six
>> months so it appears to be what our transatlantic colleagues would
>> refer to as a definite pain point.
>>
>> Setting aside the issue of how to accurately record MIME types and
>> which MIME types to record my primary concern is whether or not this
>> element should remain mandatory in the UK LOM Core. I have a new draft
>> of the UK LOM Core ready for publication but I am willing to amend the
>> guidelines for this element if the community consensus is that 4.1
>> Technical.Format should no longer be mandatory. The last time we had
>> this debate we did not arrive at any firm conclusion but I wonder if
>> list members now have stronger or clearer feelings about this issue?
>> It's the intention of the UK LOM Core to reflect community practice and
>> as you are primary stakeholders within the UK education community I
>> will respect your recommendations.
>>
>> So what's it to be....Mandatory or Optional (Recommended)?
>>
>> Bye
>> Lorna
--
Phil Barker Learning Technology Adviser
ICBL, School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Mountbatten Building, Heriot-Watt University,
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
Tel: 0131 451 3278 Fax: 0131 451 3327
Web: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/
|