Vocabulary-based vs. Schema-based mapping
Jerome Grimmer
Hi all,
One of the thorns in the side of consuming from the LR is differing interpretations of where a specific thing should go. From the beginning, there was a lot of overlap between dc:type and dc:format (in LRMI, equivalents are learningResourceType and the old, no longer used mediaType, which we still find very useful and therefore still publish in a linked data form). For example, is a video a resource type or a media type? People have argued both ways, and their arguments are generally valid for both, however from a filtering and searching perspective, it makes more sense to have video in only one place.
For several properties (the 4 accessibility properties, plus educationalUse, mediaType, education level, subject, groupType, audience, language, learningResourceType, and a few others), Illinois is researching a move towards a vocabulary-based mapping rather than a schema-based mapping. What this means is that if someone publishes “video” as a learningResourceType, we’ll automatically convert it to a mediaType. Likewise, if someone publishes “grade 8” as a keyword, we’ll be able to understand that this is a grade level and store it as a grade level rather than a keyword. This should even handle possibly silly things like converting someone’s publishing “grade 8” as a learningResourceType to an educationLevel.
I just thought I’d throw this out there, as others consuming from the LR might find this concept of mapping based on vocabulary instead of mapping based on schema to be useful in making sense of the metadata in the LR. I doubt that I’m the first one that has thought of this.
Jerome Grimmer
Southern Illinois University Carbondale
2450 Foundation Drive Suite 100
Springfield, IL
Phone: 217-786-3010 ext. 5857
Toll-free: 1-800-252-4822 ext. 5857
NOTE: My E-mail address has changed
This email sent using 100% recycled electrons.