On 16/7/04 12:03 pm, "Lorna M. Campbell" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There has already been some debate as to the relative merits of mandating
> title and rights elements, what do other list memebrs think?
>
> If we were to keep a mandatory element set, ideally what should this core
> consist of?
It all comes down to purpose...
Clearly the 4-item and even 18-item sets will not support adaptive real-time
use, as in typical SCORM/just-in-time training scenarios, where objects are
discovered and used without necessarily any intermediary selecting or
modifying the materials. So I wouldn't be able to use such objects in that
sort of scenario.
The more minimal set, like DC, looks more fit for purpose for preemptive
discovery of materials for hand-assembly into courses, where there is a
technical expert on hand to establish (by trial and error) whether they will
"play" in the local environment. Might as well use DC ;-)
Of course, is this a minimal set that should be supported as a search index
for interoperable search? Or is it disconnected from search functions, and
is about usage hints to a delivery process? Or is it both, everything, or
nothing?? I'm continually baffled by LOM I have to say :-)
- S
|