Re: EOCred: Identifying subtypes of credential

Hi Phil,

I appreciate the pragmatic approach, and I don't disagree with anything you
have said.

Where I don't want to get is where we're at with schema.org/CreativeWork
with "learningResourceType", defined as being able to be things like
"presentation" or "handout" -- These are more than just labels, these are
indicators of what properties the resource has, and violate the basis of
object oriented structures, where 'is a' relationships are defined by
subclasses and 'has a' relationships are described in properties.

Consider which sounds more clear:
Presentation is a creative work, Handout is a creative work.
Creative work has a learning resource type of Presentation.

What happens is that at some point down the line, these differences matter
enough to want to functionally distinguish between, say, a Credential and a
Qualification, or in the above, a presentation and a handout. Presentation
(as a creative work) may have a slide count, but handouts don't. Do I add a
slide count property to CreativeWork? What happens when I create
Presentation as a subtype of CreativeWork, and what does that mean for apps?

This has exactly happened. PresentationDigitalDocument is a type of
DigitalDocument is a type of CreativeWork, and http://schema.org/subEvent
states that a Presentation is probably best subtyped from Event.

So, do I create a CreativeWork with learning resource type Presentation, or
do I create a PresentationDigitalDocument? Do I redundantly label the
PresentationDigitalDocument with learning resource type: Presentation?

I get wanting to allow people to describe things in their own way, but
subtypes described as properties create enormous problems, and just as
http://schema.org/Course doesn't allow itself to be labelled with Course,
Class, Lecture, Workshop, Lab or any of the other variants (IgniteTalk,
MOOC), I don't think we should either. Especially in light that many of
these different types of credentials will have additional properties, and
will warrant subtypes. Degrees occur at masters, bachelors, associates
levels, but qualifications don't. Specific classes of teaching certificates
may only qualify at particular grade levels, and that's something you want
in the subtype but not in EOC.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 3:42 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk> wrote:

> Hello Fritz, I don't disagree with many of the points you raise, I think
> you are (mostly) factually correct, but I do disagree with your conclusion.
> This based on pragmatic judgement of what we can create and maintain, what
> we can expect to be accepted as additions to schema.org, and what we can
> expect providers of data to do.
>
> additionalType is a possibility, worth discussing separately. My concern
> is that it lacks support for text values. You and I both wish that more
> data were provided as URIs, but the reality is that there are no URIs for
> many of the credential subtypes. We have to support text values.
>
> Adding subtypes of EducationalOccupationalCredential to schema.org for
> all the specific types of credential is a non-starter for me. There would
> be thousands. We couldn't hope to collect them all, and schema.org would
> not accept so many.
>
> Creating a typology along the lines of what is in CTDL, I also do not
> think would work. I think 20 or so sub types would be too many for schema.
> Doing anything meaningful by way of a global classification of credential
> types is not a task I would want to take on (I've seen how difficult it is
> just within Europe). Some examples of the difficulties can be seen in
> trying to fit European credentials to CTDL. The distinction between Diploma
> and Certificate in the UK's HND and HNC are not well conveyed by the
> definitions for ceterms:Diploma and ceterms:Certificate, and losing
> distinctions like this would be detrimental to fulfilling the use case. I
> can also imagine all sorts of errors in data provision arising from
> instances like the old-style German Diplom and Spanish Licenciatura
> (comparable to Masters degrees, not diploma or licence).
>
> I do not agree that pointing to an externally defined term discourages
> subtyping. If a DefinedTerm is part of a DefinedTermSet, relationships
> between terms may be defined using vocabularies such as SKOS. However, the
> harsh reality in which we have to operate is that they are more likely to
> be defined in pdfs. Sorry.
>
> Finally, remember the use case is to allow people to search for a specific
> type of credential. For example, "where can I find information about
> PGCEs?". credentialType="PGCE" would suffice in many cases.
>
> Phil
>
> On 17/01/18 18:07, Fritz Ray wrote:
>
> I want to say that Stuart and I have already had this discussion, but:
>
> I don't think credentialType is needed.
>
> Adding credentialType conflicts with the intent of the object's type.
> Remember, type is just a field as well.
>
> Schema.org/Thing also has http://schema.org/additionalType to permit the
> adding of additional (specific, not defined here) type data to any object.
>
> http://schema.org/Action is a good example of where a lot of subTypes are
> added to a base class without necessarily adding properties (though some
> do!), so we also have precident there.
>
> There's lots of established avenues that allow for subtyping. On the other
> hand, there are also several instances of additional type being
> specifically identified, usually paired with a fixed taxonomy of types
> (ActionStatusType, BoardingPolicyType, BusinessEntityType,
> EventStatusType). I also believe these instances aren't in the spirit of
> schema.org.
>
> Type properties like credentialType prevent additional subtyping and
> encourage "text" descriptions (see AlignmentObject's AlignmentType) where
> it should really be URLs so that interpretations can be distinguished and
> separate.
>
> Type properties also discourage additional subtyping and do not prevent a
> means of structuring dependent subtypes. Is an IVA credential (from the
> example above) a type of SVQ credential? Without an additional structured
> ontology to point at, it is difficult to know.
>
> What additional properties does a specific type of credential confer? For
> instance, a military MOS credential may have a securityClassificationLevel.
> Do we need to add those properties to the base class? (With credentialType,
> maybe, with subtypes, certainly not.)
>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 9:04 AM, Stuart Sutton <stuartasutton@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Phil, I agree that a credentialType property is needed. I think that
>> having the range include both Text *and* URL to allow identification by
>> URI where available and text where not is appropriate. You are right that
>> CTDL defines subclasses of it's Credential class
>> <http://purl.org/ctdl/terms/Credential> and that no single enumeration
>> will handle the breadth of the range (and internationalization issues);
>> but, where such enumeration(s) exist, my sense is that they should be used.
>> The CTDL defines a credentialType
>> <http://purl.org/ctdl/terms/credentialType> property that is intended to
>> be used wherever reference to a member of the Credential class is needed.
>> It's range now enumerates the CTDL subclasses; but should likely reference
>> more inclusively the Credential class.
>>
>> As for use of TermDefinition to identify/define members of such
>> enumerations, I hope that it gets approved in a timely manner and that we
>> are not forced to even contemplate use of AlignmentObject (ugh...don't get
>> me started).
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello again, moving on to the next requirement for describing
>>> Educational and Occupational Credentials in schema.org: I suggest we
>>> look at how to identify the subtypes of these credentials.
>>>
>>> The use case for this
>>> <https://www.w3.org/community/eocred-schema/wiki/Use_Cases#Identify_subtypes_of_credential>
>>> gives examples of "degree" "certificate" "badge". I know there are about 20
>>> others from the Credential Engines' CTDL
>>> <http://credreg.net/ctdl/handbook#creds>. Most countries will have
>>> their own types of EO Credential, for example in Scotland we have  National
>>> Qualifications, HNDs, HNCs, SVQs, IVAs, PDAs, DipHEs, CertHEs and many
>>> more. Other countries will be similar. Furthermore, the types of
>>> qualification on offer changes over time.
>>>
>>> In short, the number of types is we need to consider is vast and varied.
>>> So, while CTDL has subclasses of its Credential class for each of its
>>> distinct types, that is not a practical solution for wider use. Even if we
>>> could reduce the number and variety of types, I think it would add too many
>>> subclasses to the schema.org hierarchy, given that most of the subtypes
>>> would have no unique properties.
>>>
>>> The alternative is for EducationalOccupationalCredential to have a
>>> property which records the type of credential. With a nod to Richard's
>>> point that much of what we do is applicable to generic credentials, I
>>> propose we call this credentialType.
>>>
>>> The basic range for credentialType would be text, and I think we should
>>> explicitly allow this. We could stop here.
>>>
>>> In an ideal world there would be controlled vocabulary for naming the
>>> credentialTypes. However, I a single controlled vocabulary of all the
>>> precise types is not feasible, and I think that producing a vocabulary that
>>> classifies these types into categories like "certificate" would be very
>>> difficult and the results would be very imprecise. We should, however try
>>> to facilitate the use of local controlled vocabularies. This is where we
>>> reach the edge of what currently possible in schema.org.
>>>
>>> Options for facilitating the use of local controlled vocabularies of
>>> credential type:
>>>
>>> 1, allow a URL to link to a controlled value / external enumeration.
>>>
>>> 2, allow alignmentObjects to provide information about the
>>> credentialType as if credential types were educational frameworks
>>>
>>> 3, use the developing schema.org type that is currently called
>>> CategoryCode <http://pending.schema.org/CategoryCode>, but which is
>>> proposed to be changed to TermDefinition
>>> <https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1775>
>>>
>>> In my view: 1 is too vague (who knows what will be at the end of the
>>> URL), 2 stretches the alignmentObject somewhat, and 3 is the best option
>>> for the long run. An example using option 3 would look something like:
>>> {
>>>   "@type": "EducationalOccupationalCredential",
>>>   "name" : "HNC Facilities Management",
>>>   "credentialType": {
>>>     "@type" : "TermDefinition",
>>>     "name" : "Higher National Certificate",
>>>     "termCode" : "HNC",
>>>     "inDefinedTermSet" : "SQA Qualifications" //should be a URL or
>>> DefinedTermSet object
>>>   }
>>> }
>>>
>>> What do you think? Too complicated, maybe? Am I overthinking the
>>> problem? Are there enough well-constructed sets of terms describing
>>> credential types for it to be worth trying to accommodate anything other
>>> than text values?
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
>>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;
>>> information systems for education.
>>> CETIS LLP: a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education
>>> technology.
>>>
>>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
>>> number SC569282.
>>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
>>> England number OC399090
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stuart A. Sutton, Metadata Consultant
>> Associate Professor Emeritus, University of Washington
>>    Information School
>> Email: stuartasutton@gmail.com
>> Skype: sasutton
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;
> information systems for education.
> CETIS LLP: a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education
> technology.
>
> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,
> number SC569282.
> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in
> England number OC399090
>