Re: Question about Educational content structure from Ivan Herman on 2019-08-15 (public-publishing-sc@w3.org from August 2019)

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 17:33:05 +0200
To: Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com>, W3C Publishing Steering Committee <public-publishing-sc@w3.org>
Message-Id: <B6A46D94-F284-4340-8092-4E030DB8F6F6@w3.org>
> On 15 Aug 2019, at 17:19, Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I completely agree and wasn't intending to confuse the issue. My point--which I thought was obvious but which I should have made explicitly--is that this guy is a candidate for implementing a true Web Publication. What he's got is not unlike where a lot of educational publishing is going, as well as corporate publishing and others. He's got a rich, complex publication that needs to live on the Web and is not a good candidate for EPUB. But I doubt that he is even aware that the WP work is in progress. So what he's got is a website that links to a bunch of stuff. If that's all that's needed for a Web Publication then we should probably hang up our shingle. But I think the aspects you cite, Ivan, would actually be really beneficial to a publication like this.
> 
> Or have we given up the original goal of "an arbitrarily extensive, complex, and organized collection of resources on the web (web pages, CSS, fonts, images, media, scripts, etc.) that has an identity, that can be referenced and can be archived," which is what I have always thought our ultimate goal was?

We have postponed, I would rather say, until we have a number or organizations that (a) have a clear business need and usage plans for this and (b) are represented on the WG to do the work… :-)

Ivan

> 
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 3:28 AM Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org <mailto:ivan@w3.org>> wrote:
> We should be careful with the terms we use.
> 
> - The issue/question below bears similarities with the Publication Manifest, in the terminology we use today
> - It has no direct relationship to what we used to call Web Publication, which is the manifest plus  a number of requirements, constraints, and possibilities when all this is running in 'just' a Web browser (or equivalent) instead of the safe haven, on could say, of a packaged and isolated package.
> 
> Mixing these two notions is partially the problem we have created to ourselves…
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Ivan
> 
>> On 14 Aug 2019, at 20:49, Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Agreed. My point was just that this is an example of a publication that would benefit from being a WP instead of being a scattered collection of individual resources. It's currently not a "thing" on the web, it's a bunch of things. But it probably doesn't want to be an EPUB. It's a web publication, lowercase, right now. The "things" are related but he's struggling to establish the relationships. That's what a Web Publication should enable, in a standard way.
>> 
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:15 PM Dave Cramer <dauwhe@gmail.com <mailto:dauwhe@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hi Bill,
>> 
>> I'm unsure of what the steering committee is supposed to do with information like this. A web developer is seeking advice on how to express metadata about web content in schema.org <http://schema.org/>. Qualified people are helping him. I'm not immediately seeing that the OP is having issues that could be helped by things that are in scope for Publishing @ W3C. 
>> 
>> In some sense this illustrates our fundamental problem: There are likely millions of publications on the web already. What is missing from the web platform? What types of publications can't happen on the web today? Is that because of technical limitations, or is it because the web encourages certain business models and discourages others? If stories like this actually result in use cases or requirements, that's valuable. But without a clearly-identified problem that could better be solved by something in our wheelhouse, it's hard to know what to do here. 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Dave
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 12:27 PM Bill Kasdorf <kasdorf.bill@gmail.com <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Thought I'd forward this because it is an example of somebody who needs Web Publications. . . . And maybe the current Web is pretty darn close to accommodating complex publications like this anyhow. . . .
>> 
>> There is more of this out there than we are aware of, I bet. And I bet WP is not even on his radar, though he's reaching out to schema.org <http://schema.org/> to address an issue. There should be a standard way to accomplish what he (and plenty of other folks) need to accomplish.
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> From: Phil Barker <phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk <mailto:phil.barker@pjjk.co.uk>>
>> Date: Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: Question about Educational content structure
>> To: <public-schemaorg@w3.org <mailto:public-schemaorg@w3.org>>
>> 
>> 
>> The relationship you're after is probably not workExample, unless the video is a representation of the same intellectual content as the textbook but in a different medium.
>> 
>> If you consider the test and video to be part of the content of the textbook, use hasPart. We're not paper-bound anymore so it's OK for videos to be parts of books.
>> 
>> { ...
>>   "@type": "TextBook",
>>   "hasPart" : {
>>     "@type": "Chapter",
>>     "hasPart": [
>>        { "@type": "Video" },
>>        { 
>>         "@type": "CreativeWork",
>>         "learningResourceType": "Assessment"
>>        }
>>     ]  
>>   }
>> }
>> If the Video and assessment are not parts of the textbook then (as far as schema.org <http://schema.org/> is concerned) they're just other stand-alone but linked resources.
>> 
>> A couple of things you might be interested in are:
>> 
>> - K12OCX <https://k12ocx.github.io/k12ocx-specs/>, a spec for marking up complex learning content such as courses (textbooks are similar) 
>> 
>> - some ongoing efforts in LRMI <https://www.dublincore.org/about/lrmi/> to define a concept scheme for learning resource types <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pTZd1AQMdh52otziC_s_-iE3JZOPHSVOP_6D7Bk247I/edit#heading=h.dbbp5570samf> (sorry, you'll have to trawl the DC-LRMI Task Group mail archive <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=DC-LRMI> for discussions about that and why we avoid terms like 'video' and 'text')
>> 
>> Phil (convenor of DCMI Learning Resource Metadata Initiative task group)
>> 
>> On 14/08/2019 11:06, Ghaulser Rigoti wrote:
>>> I have a web site for educational content. Since we use Book type in the home page and chapter in the pages, I would like to know the best way to descrive the links of the page. Like: I have in the chapter page a link to another webpage with exercises, another link to a youtube video, another link to a podcast... all of those resources are in external sites. So, from my page, how do I have to do the relation ship?
>>> 
>>> The json-ld for the pages are
>>> {
>>>   .
>>>   .
>>>   .
>>>   "workExample":  [
>>>     {
>>>       "@type": "CreativeWork",
>>>       "url": "www.example.com/exercise <http://www.example.com/exercise>",
>>>       "learningResourceType": "Test",
>>>     },
>>>     {
>>>       "@type": "CreativeWork",
>>>       "url": "www.example.com/video <http://www..example.com/video>",
>>>       "learningResourceType": "Video"
>>>     },
>>>   ]
>>>   .
>>>   .
>>>   .
>>> }
>>> 
>>> Is it correct to do it in this way? Any Suggestion?
>>> 
>>> Regards
>> -- 
>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>. http://people.pjjk.net/phil <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>
>> CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk/>: a cooperative consultancy for innovation in education technology.
>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk/>: technology to enhance learning; information systems for education.
>> 
>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in England number OC399090
>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company, number SC569282.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Bill Kasdorf
>> Principal, Kasdorf & Associates, LLC
>> Founding Partner, Publishing Technology Partners <https://pubtechpartners.com/>
>> kasdorf.bill@gmail.com <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
>> +1 734-904-6252
>> ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786 <http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786>
>> ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786 <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en>
>> 
>> 
>>  <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> <>
>> 
>> -- 
>> Bill Kasdorf
>> Principal, Kasdorf & Associates, LLC
>> Founding Partner, Publishing Technology Partners <https://pubtechpartners.com/>
>> kasdorf.bill@gmail.com <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
>> +1 734-904-6252
>> ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786 <http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786>
>> ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786 <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en>
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C 
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bill Kasdorf
> Principal, Kasdorf & Associates, LLC
> Founding Partner, Publishing Technology Partners <https://pubtechpartners.com/>
> kasdorf.bill@gmail.com <mailto:kasdorf.bill@gmail.com>
> +1 734-904-6252
> ISNI: http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786 <http://isni.org/isni/0000000116490786>
> ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786 <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7002-4786?lang=en>
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C 
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Received on Thursday, 15 August 2019 15:33:10 UTC