Re: Enumerations: courseMode <CourseMode>, courseDigitalFormat <CourseDigitalFormat>, accessibilityPhysicalFeature <AccessibilityPhysicalFeature>

On 01/06/16 15:49, Wes Turner wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk 
> <mailto:phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>
>     AccessibilityPhysicalFeature
>     - I think this is beyond our competence. Physical accessibility
>     for events / locations needs to be considered in a much wider
>     context than Courses and by people who understand the issues
>     involved. I would rather leave it to a different working group.
>     (This incidentally is what LRMI did for accessibility of creative
>     works, and it worked out quite well.)
>
>
> So it was in scope for LRMI.

No, it was ruled out of scope for LRMI. We passed it elsewhere.

>
>
>     CourseDigitalFormat
>     - I am not convinced we even need this as a property. Can we start
>     a separate thread to discuss it?
>
>
> CourseDigitalFormat is necessary in order to identify courses which 
> offer digital formats (such as complex XML schema).
>

I am not clear what demand there is for disseminating/finding courses in 
such complex XML schema (I assume you mean SCORM, IMS CC and the like).

Is it the Course, the CourseInstance or content associated with the 
course that is available? --I think the latter.

If there is demand, would http://schema.org/fileFormat not suffice? [see 
also https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1191 ]

Phil

-- 
--
Phil Barker           @philbarker
LRMI, Cetis, ICBL     http://people.pjjk.net/phil
Heriot-Watt University

Ubuntu: http://xkcd.com/456/
   not so much an operating system as a learning opportunity.

Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2016 15:24:47 UTC