Hello all
Bill Olivier wrote:
> My understanding of it was that the Classification:Keyword element was
> where you put the terms selected from the taxonomy specified in the
> TaxonPath. So perhaps "Classifier" or some such might have been a better
> element name than "Keyword".
>
Just to reiterate from my previous post, as far as I can see this
understanding is not supported by the text in the published standard.
(I'm not sure if Bill is still suggesting that it is, or just explaining
his previous error :-) )
Please correct me if I you think I'm wrong, but to me it seems quite
clear that both the text and the hierarchy (the Source element is nested
in the Taxon Path element, and so relates to the other elements nested
in the Taxon Path element, cf. the Purpose element which is at the
Classification level and so relates to all elements in that category) in
the standard lead me to the conclusion that the 9.2.1 Source element
applies only to the element 9.2.2 Taxon, not to 9.4 Keywords (in other
words, 9.2.2 Taxon is where you put the terms selected from the taxonomy
specified in the TaxonPath).
>
> If it's not clear in the LOM/UK LOM Core documentation how keywording
> and classification are supported, then I think you have highlighted a
> point of ambiguity, and hence of potential interoperability breakdown,
> which should be clarified in a future release of LOM/UK LOM Core.
Is there any demand for more authoritative clarification of this?
Or for local practice (ie UK LOM Core) to be that you can use element
9.2.1 to specify the source of keywords used in 9.4? --would doing this
break anyone's instances?
Or should we just push for something better next time around?
Phil.
--
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/
|