Mikael wrote:



> I brought this question up on a IEEE LOM call today, and got the

> response that

>

> 9.2 Taxon Path

> 9.3 Description, and

> 9.4 Keyword



> are more or less equivalent, semantically, which confirms your and

> Pete's analysis. The relation is slightly different from 1.5 Keyword, as

> the 9.4 keyword is intended to be applied to the Learning object, "by

> proxy".



Thanks. 'By proxy' is a good way of putting it.



> However, as the "Classification" resource actually exists for the sole

> purpose of linking a Learning Object with a classification, maybe it

> works anyway? Isn't a description of a classification still appropriate,

> given the definition of the Classification resource? 



> /Mikael



Maybe -- I'm not sure if it would make any practical difference. But I don't think what 9.4 Keyword is doing is describing the Classification resource, or at least it's definitely a different sense of 'describing' to the 1.5 to LO relationship. As Pete said, it's more of a label or name (or expression?!) of what the classification resource is. If I use the 1.5 or 9.4 keyword 'birds' then in both cases I'm saying the LO is about birds, but the 9.4 is not saying the classification resource is _about_ birds, its saying the classification resource _is_ 'birds'.



Irvin



Irvin Flack

Metadata Librarian

Centre for Learning Innovation

NSW Department of Education and Training







**********************************************************************

This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain

privileged information or confidential information or both. If you

are not the intended recipient please delete it and notify the sender.

**********************************************************************