Status of the LRMI task group

[Adrian Pohl]

Hello,

I am currently co-authoring a paper that – amongst other things – makes
the case for using schema.org/LRMI for publishing OER metadata. Looking
into the development of LRMI controlled vocabularies, I got confused
about the status of the group. Here are some of the reasons for my
confusion:

- It seems as if the Wiki doesn't exist anymore instead [0] is
redirected to an archived version on GitHub with broken links. One can
get the impression that the group has been discontinued.
- There was a call for comments [1] regarding the LRMI vocabs and I know
of several people having submitted input. The comments are gone from the
public google doc [2] and the links in the document as well as in [1]
are broken because someone removed the GitHub repo and instead put the
vocabs in a folder of the general lrmi repo, see [3]. I haven't heard
anything about the further process of developing the vocabularies and
about taking into account the comments.

Has there any work been going on since 2015? What are the plans for the
future of LRMI? Let me know if you need any support.

All the best
Adrian

[0] http://dublincore.org/archive/mediawiki_wiki/AB-Comm/ed/LRMI/TG
[1]
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind1510&L=DC-EDUCATION&F=&S=&P=57
[2] http://bit.ly/LRMI-Vocabs1
[3] https://github.com/dcmi/lrmi/tree/master/lrmi_vocabs

[Phil Barker]

Hello Adrian, everyone,

Stuart Sutton might be best placed to answer some of these questions that relate to changes in the DCMI web site, but I am not sure whether he is able to answer emails at the moment so I will try. 

LRMI task group is active. Currently focussing on some proposed work for describing competency frameworks. We have monthly calls (though yesterday's was cancelled).  Perhaps we should do more to encourage widened participation in these.

The wiki not existing is, I think, due to some changes at DCMI. Sorry I don't know why.

The work on the vocabularies stalled due to a dependencies on PURLs while the PURL resolver was broken. I am sorry that we got distracted and didn't pick it up again when that was fixed; I think we should. The (moved) github repository is the most up to date record of that work, the google doc has served its purpose--I will annotate it as such.

Would you like to join the next call? Normally they are on the third Thursday of the month.

Regards, Phil

--

Phil Barker. http://people.pjjk.net/phil
PJJK Limited: technology to enhance learning; information systems for education.

PJJK Limited is registered in the UK as a private limited company, number SC569282.

[Stuart Sutton]

Hi Adrian and Phil. Phil is correct that on all counts. The LRMI TG is active. DCMI is going through a update and consolidation of its technical infrastructure, part of which was the decommissioning of the wiki. The next step will be integration of the current LRMI website into the new DCMI website infrastructure. The functions of the LRMI wiki will resume there.

Phil is correct that the work on the first phase of the LRMI value vocabularies is complete and resolution of the the long absence of the PURL service means our final step is assignment of concept and concept scheme PURLs. That happens in the first week of December. We'll announce their publication here and on the LRMI site. The github vocabularies to be published now are:

1. Alignment Type
2. Educational Audience Role
   
3. Educational Use
4. Interactivity Type

Further work needs to be done on Learning Resource Type and a decision made as to the accessibility vocabularies.

We did, in fact, move the LRMI work in GitHub to it's own folder so the moved repo is correct (https://github.com/dcmi/lrmi/tree/master/lrmi_vocabs).

Sorry for all the confusion. 

Adrian, if you are interested in being part of the LRMI TG work, please join the jiscmail list here: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?SUBED1=dc-lrmi&A=1

Stuart

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Learning Resource Metadata Initiative" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lrmi+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Stuart A. Sutton, Metadata Consultant

Associate Professor Emeritus, University of Washington 

   Information School

Email: stuart...@gmail.com

Skype: sasutton

[Dan Brickley]

hi folks,

On 13 October 2017 at 12:40, Stuart Sutton <stuart...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Adrian and Phil. Phil is correct that on all counts. The LRMI TG is active. DCMI is going through a update and consolidation of its technical infrastructure, part of which was the decommissioning of the wiki. The next step will be integration of the current LRMI website into the new DCMI website infrastructure. The functions of the LRMI wiki will resume there.

Phil is correct that the work on the first phase of the LRMI value vocabularies is complete and resolution of the the long absence of the PURL service means our final step is assignment of concept and concept scheme PURLs. That happens in the first week of December. We'll announce their publication here and on the LRMI site. The github vocabularies to be published now are:

1. Alignment Type
2. Educational Audience Role
   
3. Educational Use
4. Interactivity Type

Further work needs to be done on Learning Resource Type and a decision made as to the accessibility vocabularies.

Glad to hear things are moving along. If there's interest in getting the Schema.org representation of LRMI updated, we ought to make some noise in that direction in public. Would it just be updating the existing term definitions to point to where the values can be be found, or some more substantive update?

All the best,

Dan

[Phil Barker]

Hi Dan,

On 13/10/17 18:42, Dan Brickley wrote:

Further work needs to be done on Learning Resource Type and a decision made as to the accessibility vocabularies.

Glad to hear things are moving along. If there's interest in getting the Schema.org representation of LRMI updated, we ought to make some noise in that direction in public. Would it just be updating the existing term definitions to point to where the values can be be found, or some more substantive update?

Updating the examples to point to the term definitions (when they are finished and published) would be great.

What would be really good would be movement on issue 894 in the direction of DefinedTermSet / TermDefinition, then we could (a) publish these with appropriate schema.org mark up, and (b) with some suitable tweaks to expected ranges, show how they are used as DefinedTerms in markup examples. (The category code approach doesn't really work for us)

Longer term, we could do lots with educational competencies as a type of DefinedTerm. Competence based education is a big thing right now, and a way defining the competencies would really help.

Do you have any idea of whether movement on issue 894 is likely? Can we help? As far as the name changes from what is in pending go, I would be happy to push some updated definition rdfa files your way.

Phil

[Hugh Paterson III]

I am interested in learning more about the TG.

I am currently working though a list of competencies in linguistics, language learning, and language development (I have not found a resource that contains these sorts of competencies). I have the goal of aligning curriculum components to these competencies using LRMI. Has anyone experience in defining competencies in Language fluency? I imagine that ISO 639-3 could be used to define the language, but I was wondering if there is anyone who has modeled language curriculum at the secondary, or university levels of education - no sense in reinventing the wheel.

- Hugh Paterson III

--

[Phil Barker]

Hello Hugh, everyone.

Modelling a specific curriculum or subject would be out of scope of the TG. The work of the task group is more about building the metadata framework through which models of any curriculum for any subject could be expressed. That said, I am sure that language learning would be an excellent test case for any framework, and you are welcome to join. Currently active discussions are  on how to express competency frameworks and controlled vocabularies (value lists) for some of the existing terms. We have calls on the third Thursday of each month, which are advertised through the TG list.

There may be people on this LRMI group who have experience of expressing metadata about language education in LRMI. My only experience has been through some consultancy work. I cannot remember the details (and it was proprietary anyway) but we did make use of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages [1] and the alignment object. There was also an interesting distinction between what a resource was about (e.g. people, food, sport) and what was the aspect of language learning being addressed, which made sense with respect to the schema.org properties of about and educational alignment to an educational subject.

Regards, Phil

1. https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lrmi+uns...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Hugh Paterson III]

@Phil, 

thank you. is there a standing time and medium for these calls? just subscribed to that list too.

- Hugh

[Phil Barker]

Yes, time is usually 8:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada), which would normally be 1700 in Central Europe (depending on daylight saving). You'll get a reminder / full details through the TG list.

DCMI host the meeting using Zoom <https://zoom.us/>

Phil

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lrmi+uns...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.