The 'ORE one', ie ours, is not a repository. We've got one of those
already - http://ostrich.bath.ac.uk , wouldn't wish to make another.
It is rather a proposal to implement the OAI-ORE standard for the
purpose of presenting OERs as aggregations of resources, as resuable,
disaggregable objects of complex types.
On 13/04/11 11:45, Scott Wilson wrote:
> #1 I really like the "Cut and Paste Reuse Tracking" proposal - its novel but also connected to "real world" use. I suspect its actually the most technically challenging in reality but well worth pursuing.
>
> #2 I don't think OER Bookmarking is viable as it really would have to be "another delicious". HOWEVER - If it were instead a proposal to try to work with Yahoo! and other sites to offering bookmarking to get them to integrate better licensing into their sites, that would potentially be a far more interesting proposition though obviously with less predictable outcomes. (Another option might be to work with oEmbed. That probably goes for #1 too)
>
> #3 I think vocab management tools is a non-starter as vocabularies are principally a system-wide management and sustainability problem not a technical problem.
>
> #4 And finally, the ORE one is a repository.
>
> ---
> S
>
--
Alex Lydiate
Software& Systems Developer
LTEO - WH5.39
University of Bath
01225 383576
|