 |
 |
Sorry--I neglected to change the "TO:" when replying ... Diane --- begin forwarded text Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:43:30 +0800 To: Liddy Nevile <[log in to unmask]> From: "Diane I. Hillmann" <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: DC-Ed and Accessibility: was DC-Education Application Profile: update + feedback requested Cc: Bcc: X-Attachments: Liddy: I certainly agree with Sarah that this work is very interesting and useful, but I don't see the strong connection with the education profile work that would be required for us to consider making recommendations for its use with the DC-Ed AP. The new emphasis on description sets, which we are relying on in our thinking about the modular aspects of the DC-Ed work, makes it possible for us all to consider how that point of view empowers us to explore various kinds of descriptions that can be combined in a description set for the consumption of applications. While I think we all support the idea that accessibility is an important aspect of all kinds of resources, it doesn't seem to me that we advance either the goals of the DC-Ed Community or the DC Accessibility Community by attempting to combine our work at this stage. Rather, I hope that we can fully explore the possibilities of these modular APs and how they might be usefully combined as description sets. Diane >Robyn >the AccessForAll work is all about metadata to describe resources >and services and lots of other things for education and general >contexts. IMS and now ISO have adopted the AccessForAll approach and >DC has adopted it for general situations. >The IMS work was done first and published earlier but is now being >revised. The ISO work followed the work done for IMS and acted as >both an internationalisation and revision exercise and will be >published soon - by ISO JTC1 SC36. At the same time as we did the >IMS and ISO work we have done the DC version work - so all three are >compatible. The DC work is not a DC recommendation but is ready for >use. >So, whatever scheme of metadata you are working in - you can adopt >the AccessForAll approach. > >I suggest you look at the DC Accessibility site where I have >explained all these bits in detail and esp at the current docs that >are on the DC Accessibility wiki to see how DC does AccessForAll. > >See http://dublincore.org/groups/access >and >http://dublincore.org/accessibilitywiki > >I hope this helps... > >Liddy > > > >On 29/08/2007, at 12:52 PM, Robyn White wrote: > >> >>Hi Liddy >> >>I need to read some more around this, though not because I am unconvinced of >>the need! >> >>As a slight aside to the current discussion I note that you mentioned the >>'ISO version'. >> >>I recently provided feedback on the 'ISO/IEC CD 19788-2 - ITLET - Metadata >>for learning resources - Part 2: Core elements' document and one of the >>things I mentioned was that there is no element that allows for information >>about the accessibility of a resource, a core consideration for learners >>with diverse needs or disabilities. >> >>Did I miss something in this document or are you referring to something >>else? >> >>robyn >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: DCMI Education Community [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On >>Behalf Of Liddy Nevile >>Sent: Wednesday, 29 August 2007 2:11 p.m. >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: DC-Ed and Accessibility: was DC-Education Application Profile: >>update + feedback requested >> >>Sarah >>we are sitting in the same room and I have seen you and heard you but >>no, we have not yet caught up! >> >>The metadata for accessibility is new but it is available in both the >>IMS and the DC world and it is currently being implemented in many >>major locations - so you have not seen a lot of it yet but it is coming! >> >>The DC version is considered at length on the DC accessibility pages >>so that is where you find what I am talking about. The IMS (LOM) >>version is available from IMS, and there is the ISO version which is >>about to be published by ISO (BTW, BSI is deeply involved in this for >>the UK, eg). >> >>I hope we can meet and talk in the next couple of days! >> >>Liddy >> >> >>On 29/08/2007, at 11:01 AM, Sarah Currier wrote: >> >>>Hi Robyn, et al, >>> >>>Many thanks for your comments and feedback. It's all extremely >>>useful and doesn't need much discussion (from me anyway- everyone >>>else go ahead!); the only bit I think I need to respond to right >>>now is the comment on accessibility, and I'd like to start a new >>>thread on this. Thanks also to Liddy for her previous email re >>>accessibility: I had meant to catch up with Liddy in person re this >>>here at DC-2007 in Singapore but haven't managed it yet, and in any >>>case, it is important to also discuss on the list. We are also >>>having our DC-Education AP meeting this afternoon, where I will >>>raise the issue. Anyway: >>> >>>>Accessibility - The application profile should provide for >>>>information about the accessibility (or adaptability) of a >>>>resource for those with special requirements in educational settings. >>>> >>> >>>Back when I first started working on the DC-Ed AP last year, Liddy >>>emailed us re this issue and I responded that I didn't know of any >>>education-specific properties of resources related to >>>accessibility, and asked to be pointed in the right direction of >>>any work in this area. I'm still not sure what "special >>>requirements in educational settings" might be, over and above >>>accessibility requirements for using any type of resource. I am >>>*very* keen to get some clarity on this as it is extremely >>>important, but it is not my area of expertise, so would be grateful >>>if someone out there could point the DC-Ed community in the right >>>direction, or advise us directly. >>> >>>> >>>>If we are to use elements already in existence this could be >>>>addressed in IEEE LOM 9.1 Classification Purpose, although the >>>>existing value space of "accessibility restrictions" may not be >>>>the best way to think of it. Discussion with Liddy and the >>>>accessibility group will add much clarity to this thinking! >>>> >>> >>>Yes, I agree, this is likely not an ideal solution, and hasn't been >>>used much in the LOM community as far as I know. The LOM >>>Classification elements do not sit easily with DC anyway- not sure >>>how the LOM/DC Task Force are approaching this one, hopefully will >>>find out later today. We may need to propose a new element but I >>>am hoping, with all the accessibility work that's been going on >>>around the world for years, that we can reuse someone else's, i.e. >>>one from another metadata schema. >>> >>>I emphasise again, to be within scope for the DC-Ed AP, any >>>accessibility property would need to be specific to the educational >>>nature, attributes or context of a resource. >>> >>>Best wishes to all from Singapore, >>>Sarah >>> >>>-- 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] -- --- end forwarded text