Liddy, while I might well be wrong, it would seem to me that given the
modular structure of both the education AP profile and the accessibility
AP profile that we have no means to _ensure_ that both (or either) are
included where we might think it useful or necessary. While technical
issues around the incorporation of AP modules into full (or master) APs
has yet to be thoroughly explored, I wonder if it is wise to try and
make demands on what should or should not be included in a community's
AP. For example, we might _hope_ and highly _recommend_ that the
education module might play a role in a community's full AP where that
community addresses educational resources--the same for accessibility
AP. But, _ensure_?
Stuart
Stuart A. Sutton, Associate Professor
The Information School Research Commons
University of Washington
4311 11th Ave NE, Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98105
http://www.ischool.washington.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: DCMI Education Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Liddy Nevile
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 2:49 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: DC-Ed and Accessibility: was DC-Education Application
Profile: update + feedback requested
mmmm... I realise I sort of agree with Phil!
It is my opinion that the accessibility module should just sit beside
the ed one but I would not like to support a situation in which the
ed profile stood alone without the accessibility module. How do we
ensure that does not happen?
Liddy
On 29/08/2007, at 7:31 PM, Phil Barker wrote:
>
> Hello all, hope those of you in Singapore are having a great time.
>
> Liddy Nevile wrote:
>>
>> We refer to the AccessForAll DC metadata not as an application
>> profile for accessibility but as an application profile module so
>> that it is clear the same module can be plugged into DC govt, DC
>> education, DC tools, etc application profiles.
> Either I misunderstand what the DC-Ed working group is doing, or I
> don't understand why this conversation (important though it is) is
> happening here. As I understand it, the DC-Ed work likewise is also
> not developing an application profile for education but rather an
> application profile module that can be plugged into generic
> metadata element sets (together with AccessForAll) for resource
> description in education contexts. I don't see the lack of
> accessibility metadata in the current draft DE-Education AP any
> more of a problem than the lack of title, description, author or
> identifier.
>
> [Aside: "application profile module" seems to me to be a better
> term than "modular application profile" for this sort of work,
> unless I'm wrong in my understanding of what the DC-Ed working
> group is doing.]
>
> So, to go back to Sarah's question, are there any access/disability
> issues that are specific to education? Supplementary questions: are
> these so specific to education that they are not covered in the
> AccessForAll profile, or are they covered there but more important
> in education than other contexts?
>
>
> Phil
>
|