Ah. I hadn't seen Stuart's message under this thread heading before 
writing my last message.  And nor had I remembered that Sarah had 
started this thread.  In order make sure it's in the right place, here's 
my last message under the right heading. But I still haven't read 
Stuart's email on the subject (which came in while I was writing this). P.


OK, on the basis that we are close to agreement, let's try to come to 
some understanding of what the gap is and how to bridge it.

I think for me it is Stuart's use of words like "intrinsic" (in the 
email below)  "intent" and "purpose" (in the definition offered at 
<http://dublincore.org/educationwiki/Classes> ). Why is that? Well, it's 
based on my understanding (which may not be shared) that we are talking 
about the class of entities that are represented by the "resource" cloud 
in the current domain model, and that purple boxes around this cloud 
(e.g. educational activity and audience) are different classes of 
entity. So, I don't think that the properties and relationships that 
define the resource in the centre as being a "learning resource" are 
necessarily intrinsic to or relate to the purpose of *that resource*. I 
have a couple of other problems with the definition offered by Stuart on 
the wiki, but these are more to do with wording (what does it mean to 
say a resource has a purpose; aren't all purposes intentional; how does 
the requirement for a defined learning goal relate to informal education?).

As a way forward I suggest we adopt something akin to Duck typing 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_typing>. That is, if we see a 
resource that walks like a learning resource, swims like a learning 
resource,  and quacks like a learning resource, we call it a learning 
resource, where this AP defines the analogues or walking, swimming and 
quacking. So, once we have defined the key educational relationships and 
properties of resources that AP describes, we say that a learning 
resource is a resource that has at least one of these. For example (as 
the model stands), if you can talk about the educational level of an 
audience for which resource was used, or you can identify an educational 
activity for which the resource was used or is intended, or etc..., then 
you have a resource for which the DC-Ed AP module is relevant.

BTW, am I right in thinking that the Dublin Core view of a resource is 
defined as "anything that may be identified". If so I think there may be 
other aspects apart from educational intent that would affect the scope 
of the "resource" class in the middle. Do we want people, places, 
concepts to be in scope?

Phil

Stuart Sutton wrote:
Hi, Phil.  I actually believe that we are closer in view than our emails 
of late may tend to indicate.  I agree 100% with the substance of your 
statement: "My own view is that the AP needs to have a larger scope 
where these may be properties of the educational activity."  As far as I 
am concerned, the blueprint of an educational activity that can be 
described is an entity and therefore a learning resource.  When you say, 
Phil, that "many properties that relate to  education may be properties 
of the  resource or of the educational activity,  depending on the  
resource and how it is used", I again agree.  But I would say that a 
resource where no such activity is intrinsic as would be the case with, 
say, a lesson plan or some resource/application that leads a student 
through such an activity, then that resource is not a learning resource 
until so imbued.  Its potential as a learning resource is latent and the 
DC-Ed Ap interest in it is minimal or non-existent.

Phil, do you mean in your closing paragraph that what is in scope and 
out of scope with the cloud in the current version of the model are 
properties and not resources?  That's not clear on the face of the 
model.  All the more reason that the proposed model needs clarifying 
discussion (and better yet, documentation and definitions).

Stuart

-- 
Phil Barker                            Learning Technology Adviser
     ICBL, School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
     Mountbatten Building, Heriot-Watt University, 
     Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
     Tel: 0131 451 3278    Fax: 0131 451 3327
     Web: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/



-- 
Heriot-Watt University is a Scottish charity
registered under charity number SC000278.