W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > June 2012

Re: (most likely) Version 1.0 of LRMI specification - proposed for inclusion with Schema.org

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 09:56:35 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFfrAFqrjqcT4h=JAX=_iDaS-+nwSxY1yPTp4TK6353pY97+RA@mail.gmail.com>
To: lrmi@googlegroups.com
Cc: Greg Grossmeier <greg@creativecommons.org>, public-vocabs@w3.org
On 14 June 2012 09:48, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> [sidestepping any consideration of what is a "course" and what is "course
> content"]
>
> One thing to bear in mind is that in schema.org Creative Works and Events
> are distinct types of thing. LRMI defines properties that are available for
> Creative Works and subtypes thereof. So using Event start and end dates
> along with LRMI properties would require that an item has two itemtypes.
> That seems to be legal for microdata (now, it wasn't always)[1] -- anyone
> know how well it is supported for schema.org?

We're ok with that. For example, every http://schema.org/LocalBusiness
is both a Place and an Organization.

Things can have multiple types, without needing to mention each type
every time. RDFa Lite is also fine with listing several types in a
description; it handles this quite naturally.

Dan

> If you're interested in ontologies for advertising courses, I would suggest
> looking at XCRI-CAP http://www.xcri.co.uk/ or other variants of CEN MLO-AD
> http://www.cen-ltso.net/Main.aspx?put=1042
> --it may be possible to map this to schema.org + some extensions.
>
>
> Phil
>
> 1. See http://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/#items
>
>
> On 14/06/12 00:36, Greg Grossmeier wrote:
>>
>> [I've added in the LRMI mailing list, for good measure.]
>>
>> If you are interested we have some examples of marked up
>> content/resources at:
>>   http://www.lrmi.net/the-specification/examples
>>
>> If you have some other good examples that you want to try marking up,
>> please do. Or send them my way. I'll try to get to them as I can.
>>
>> One thing to remember is that the use case for LRMI (as indicated in its
>> name) is the resource level (whatever that means) as opposed to the
>> course level. This let us avoid complexities of defining a taxonomy of a
>> course (define "course") within LRMI and instead left that with the
>> course publisher. But each bit of the course can be marked up with LRMI
>> (which is at a level that most learners, especially in the K12 arena,
>> want; they want something that supplements a topic they are learning in
>> class).
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> <quote name="Peter Pinch" date="2012-06-13" time="18:13:07 +0000">
>>>
>>> I'm in — to the extent that OpenCourseWare fits anyone's model.
>>>
>>> -----------
>>> Peter Pinch
>>> Production Manager, MIT OpenCourseWare
>>> pdpinch@mit.edu<mailto:pdpinch@mit.edu>
>>> http://ocw.mit.edu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Aaron Bradley<aaranged@yahoo.com<mailto:aaranged@yahoo.com>>
>>> Reply-To: Aaron Bradley<aaranged@yahoo.com<mailto:aaranged@yahoo.com>>
>>> Date: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 1:58 PM
>>> To: Martin
>>> Hepp<martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org<mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>>,
>>> Greg Grossmeier<greg@creativecommons.org<mailto:greg@creativecommons.org>>,
>>> Dan Brickley<danbri@danbri.org<mailto:danbri@danbri.org>>
>>> Cc:
>>> "public-vocabs@w3.org<mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org>"<public-vocabs@w3.org<mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org>>,
>>> Peter Pinch<pdpinch@mit.edu<mailto:pdpinch@mit.edu>>
>>> Subject: Re: (most likely) Version 1.0 of LRMI specification - proposed
>>> for inclusion with Schema.org
>>>
>>> Couldn't agree more Martin.  While I haven't had time to address the LRMI
>>> proposal fully, I have been doing some course modeling that is not yet
>>> complete.
>>>
>>> It would be useful to bring in some other course vendors - both free
>>> (e.g. http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm) and commercial (e.g.
>>> http://www.newsu.org/) to get their input.  I will reach out but would
>>> welcome input from anyone on this or the LRMI list that falls into this
>>> category.
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Martin
>>> Hepp<martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org<mailto:martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>>
>>> To: Greg
>>> Grossmeier<greg@creativecommons.org<mailto:greg@creativecommons.org>>; Dan
>>> Brickley<danbri@danbri.org<mailto:danbri@danbri.org>>
>>> Cc: public-vocabs@w3.org<mailto:public-vocabs@w3.org>; Peter
>>> Pinch<pdpinch@MIT.edu<mailto:pdpinch@MIT.edu>>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 10:55:06 PM
>>> Subject: Re: (most likely) Version 1.0 of LRMI specification - proposed
>>> for inclusion with Schema.org
>>>
>>> Hi Greg, Dan:
>>>
>>> What we should keep on our radar is checking that you can model
>>> commercial courses / training using both the LRMI and the GoodRelations
>>> extension of schema.org.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On May 24, 2012, at 12:36 AM, Greg Grossmeier wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Peter,
>>>>
>>>> <quote name="Peter Pinch" date="2012-05-22" time="17:29:52 +0000">
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm excited to see this moving along as well. Two questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. What's the possibility for considering the online course suggestions
>>>>> Aaron Bradley made? If it's too late to propose new properties (I.e.
>>>>> Credit), can we at least document as best practice the use of the Event
>>>>> type for describing start and end dates?
>>>>
>>>> It is true that defining a 'course' in the LRMI standard was out of
>>>> scope. However, as I believe Aaron stated, there is no reason why a
>>>> course could not be made up of distinct pieces (resources) that are
>>>> marked up with LRMI.
>>>>
>>>> But, it is true that there is no way to describe the course itself via
>>>> LRMI terms. I, honestly, haven't thought through the use of Event start
>>>> and end dates for that type of thing. That type of addition would be
>>>> useful for a certain kind of course (that is describable online) (ie:
>>>> those which are bound by a time and have regular meetings) but it
>>>> doesn't do much for a self-learner type course.
>>>>
>>>> These are good things to think about and I look forward to working with
>>>> the community to address them intelligently.
>>>>
>>>>> 2. Is anything happening with accessibility?
>>>>
>>>> As you may know, LRMI began with an eye towards accessibility but we
>>>> quickly dropped it as we did not have the expertise within our Technical
>>>> Working Group, and managing the process for learning resources was time
>>>> consuming enough :)
>>>>
>>>> However, there is work being done now by some in the accessibility
>>>> community to augment LRMI (or plain Schema.org) with ally information.
>>>> Be on the look out for an update on that as we know more.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Greg Grossmeier
>>>> Education Technology&  Policy Coordinator
>>>>
>>>> twitter: @g_gerg / identi.ca: @greg / skype: greg.grossmeier
>>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------
>>> martin hepp
>>> e-business&  web science research group
>>>
>>> universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen
>>>
>>> e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org<mailto:hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
>>> phone:  +49-(0)89-6004-4217
>>> fax:    +49-(0)89-6004-4620
>>> www:    http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
>>>         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
>>> skype:  mfhepp
>>> twitter: mfhepp
>>>
>>> Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
>>> =================================================================
>>> * Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Ubuntu: not so much an operating system as a learning opportunity.
>
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 07:57:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 June 2012 07:57:13 GMT