Sarah
I am sorry to say I have not kept up with all the developments in
this but I am concerned to know that you have been able to include
the necessary application profile 'module' for accessibility. Given
the new ISO standard and the LOM work, I recommend that there be at
least a term 'accessmode' included. Having values for this term
chosen from the four to do with auditory, visual, tactile, olfactory
and the additional one of textual will make a HUGE difference to the
lives of students/teachers with disabilities. There are many other
characteristics that specialists may add with respect to
adaptability but the big one is perception mode that is no covered
by other terms and makes the biggest difference. I think it is very
easy to add the data and should be done on all components and
composite educational resources and others that might be used in
educational settings.
For further information, it is probably best to visit the pages about
accessibility - http://dublincore.org/groups/access but esp. the
current documents etc which are at http://dublincore.org/
accessibilitywiki
I hope that some of you concerned about education will be able to
come and discuss this with us in the accessibility special session at
DC 2007 (on Thursday, I think). Unfortunately I will not be able to
attend your education session.
Liddy
On 15/08/2007, at 10:09 PM, Sarah Currier wrote:
>
> Thanks very much Phil- your comments on both the broad and the
> specific are very helpful, as always. I think what we call the
> profile still needs thought for the very reasons you mention (it's
> a thin, modular, partial duck - it only has wings but my goodness
> they are great wings for teaching and learning). I won't reply in
> detail to your points because I'll just go "Yeah, yeah".
>
> As for my summer, well, it's kinda turning into a Dublin Core
> Summer: while I am delighted with the response to our draft profile
> (it's so much better than silence), all you clever folks are giving
> me more and more work :-)
>
> Keep 'em coming, everyone.
>
> S.
>
>
> Phil Barker wrote:
>> Hello Sarah, hope you're having a wonderful summer. Many thanks to
>> you and your colleagues for sharing this, I have a few comments on
>> the details of the documents, but first a couple of more general
>> observations.
>>
>> Firstly, I think one of the previous comments or replies mentioned
>> that this isn't really an application profile as we know it.
>> Indeed, you make this point yourself in the document, but if you
>> call something a "thin" duck and then explain that it doesn't walk
>> like a duck or quack like a duck then you're probably going to
>> have difficulty communicating what the thing really is. I found it
>> useful to think of it as a "partial profile", in other words a set
>> of elements useful for profiles in a particular context.
>>
>> Secondly, I think I agree with Andy's comments about the need for
>> an entity relationship model to support this work. Not (only)
>> because of any distinction between what we might want to say
>> about works/expressions/manifestations/items, but because there
>> are a whole load of other entities implied in the description:
>> learners, qualifications, "contexts" , and I think it would help
>> clarify discussion on some elements if we could what they applied
>> to. I think your discussion of LOM 5.11 education.language is the
>> simplest case where an entity-relation model that included the
>> learner would help [language of the resource is not the same as
>> language of the learner even if it is described by the same DC
>> element], subject is another, see below.
>>
>> Now the minutiae ...
>>
>>
>> In Functional requirements you say
>> "b. Support for Educational Use of Resources
>> The DC-Ed AP must support those interested in teaching and
>> learning (primarily educational practitioners but possibly others)
>> in determining a resource's potential for use within a given
>> educational setting."
>> Is it really the intention to concentrate so specifically on the
>> needs of teachers (if that is what you mean by educational
>> practitioners) not learners or parents? it seems a strange
>> limitation in scope for work at this level. What are the
>> consequences of this?
>>
>>
>> In the intro, you say
>> "The exception to the focus on educational properties is for
>> Subject and Type, where the AP intends to suggest vocabularies of
>> specific use for educational materials." which struck me as odd at
>> first. Then I read the element definition table where you suggest
>> subject might describe "A reference to a standard for curriculum,
>> competency or learning objective to which the resource conforms."
>> So LOM 9 Classification with 9.1 Classification.Purpose =
>> educational objective and 9.1 Classification.Purpose = competency
>> would be relevant. I'm inclined to think that this is different to
>> (or perhaps a significant refinement of) subject. Seems like
>> DC:relation with conformsTo refinement is better place for
>> references to such standards. Which makes me think that this is
>> one of the cases where an entity relationship model might be
>> useful: your not describing the resource per se, you're describing
>> the course the student might be on -- that relationship, not the
>> subject attribute, is education specific.
>>
>> Still on the subject row in that table, the wording "DC-Ed AP to
>> recommend vocabularies in use within educational metadata, e.g.
>> Joint Academic Coding System (JACS) in the UK." could be taken to
>> mean that DCMI will recommend that if you're in UK HE then you
>> should use JACS, which is probably not what you mean. It might be
>> better to say "e.g. the UK HE Joint Aca...(JACS)"
>>
>>
>>
>> In the vocab listings:
>> For LTSN Pedagogic terms you give the LTSN resource type
>> vocabulary, which is a bit confusing since there was an LTSN
>> pedagogy vocabulary, which is now the HE Academy pedagogy
>> vocabulary available at http://www.connect.ac.uk/ixbin/hixltp?
>> _IXACTION_=file&_IXFILE_=templates%2Fvocab%
>> 2Ftop.html&_IXthes=Pedagogy
>>
>> For the row heading of TLTP vocabularies you talk about the TLRP
>> vocabs.
>>
>> [and if these came directly from the CETIS pedagogy vocabularies
>> report then I'm deeply embarrassed about not spotting them then.]
>>
>>
>> Hope this helps, Phil.
>>
>> ps. the notes I made as I went along are available at
>> http://www.google.com/notebook/public/16007482002381607562/
>> BDQTGQgoQtpbh88Ui?hl=en <http://www.google.com/notebook/public/
>> 16007482002381607562/BDQTGQgoQtpbh88Ui?hl=en>
>> which has a little more detail in places.
>>
>> Sarah Currier wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> The Dublin Core Conference 2007 in Singapore is fast
>>> approaching. The next face-to-face meeting of the DC-Ed
>>> Community will take place there.
>>>
>>> Diane Hillmann, Stuart Sutton and I have been working hard to get
>>> draft materials related to the proposed DC-Ed Application Profile
>>> ready for this meeting. We would like to disseminate the results
>>> of this work prior to the meeting so that anyone who can't attend
>>> can give feedback and input. We'd be very grateful if you could
>>> spend some time having a look and feeding back to us. Discussion
>>> on this list is particularly welcome. If you only have time to
>>> look at the areas that particularly interest you, that's fine! I
>>> have tried to delineate the different areas we'd like feedback on
>>> below, to make it easier for you.
>>>
>>> We now have a wiki page linking to a new draft Application
>>> Profile document:
>>> http://dublincore.org/educationwiki/
>>> Working_20Draft_20of_20DC_2dEd_20Application_20Profile
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sarah Currier
>>> Co-Moderator, Dublin Core Education Community
>>>
>>> Product Manager, Intrallect Ltd.
>>> http://www.intrallect.com
>>>
>>> 2nd Floor, Regent House
>>> Blackness Road
>>> Linlithgow
>>> EH49 7HU
>>> United Kingdom
>>>
>>> Tel: +44 870 234 3933 Mob: +44 (0)7980855801
>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask] --
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sarah Currier
>>> Product Manager, Intrallect Ltd.
>>> http://www.intrallect.com
>>>
>>> 2nd Floor, Regent House
>>> Blackness Road
>>> Linlithgow
>>> EH49 7HU
>>> United Kingdom
>>>
>>> Tel: +44 870 234 3933 Mob: +44 (0)7980855801
>>> E-mail: [log in to unmask] --
>
> --
> Sarah Currier
> Product Manager, Intrallect Ltd.
> http://www.intrallect.com
>
> 2nd Floor, Regent House
> Blackness Road
> Linlithgow
> EH49 7HU
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 870 234 3933 Mob: +44 (0)7980855801
> E-mail: [log in to unmask] --
|
