|LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Greg Grossmeier||1/23/12 2:18 PM|
The latest version of the LRMI specification, version 0.7, is now in
Public comment ends *January 31st*.
Please provide any feedback on the LRMI mailing list:
The hope is that this version, with any issues presented during this
|Re: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Dan Brickley||1/27/12 5:46 AM|
On Jan 23, 11:18 pm, Greg Grossmeier <g...@creativecommons.org> wrote:Hi folks. Great to see this coming along! I've a question about
Specifically it has recently been suggested by at least two parties
that schema.org should add vocab to support description of "Question
and Answer" sites / threads.
For example see thread with Nick Craver from Stack Overflow via
@Nick_Craver you're not the first to ask, re Q/A type for schema.org.
Do you have any more detailed thoughts re requirements?
@danbri I think we'd be more than happy to take time a fully flush it
out if it would help better the internet Q&A community as a whole
@danbri Off the cuff, question: title, body, author, link, answers
with: body, author, link...no current format is even in the ballpark"
This exchange in turn led to some discussion pointing at IMS
educational technology specs, https://twitter.com/#!/lastkaled/status/162879844663824384
Classic schema scoping issues. Do you have a sense for how LRMI
relates to these kinds of scenario for schema.org descriptions?
|Re: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Brian Ausland||1/27/12 5:55 AM|
Thanks Greg, my team and I are going to go through this top to bottom next week.
Great work, nice detail.
California Center for the Advancement of Digital Resources in Education
California Dept. of Education
|Re: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Greg Grossmeier||1/30/12 9:39 AM|
<quote name="Dan Brickley" date="2012-01-27" time="05:46:25 -0800">
> Classic schema scoping issues. Do you have a sense for how LRMI
Probably not very directly, or at least, not at this point in the
I would look to the StackExchange community for guidance in this issue,
|RE: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Joshua Marks||1/31/12 5:11 PM|
I agree. I believe we need a separate and detailed list of
preferred/suggested values for each of these string based properties. We
also need a list of indentified competency promulgators that might be
referenced in a alignment.
I welcome you to become a member of the Curriki community, to follow us
Similarly, I thought we would generate a richer list of suggested
|Re: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Mike Collett||2/2/12 4:14 AM|
There has been considerable work undertaken in the UK and Europe.
This represents European Schoolnet, work mostly for metadata for their Learning Resource Exchange. It has vocabularies for many LOM properties including the LOM terms.
Most terms have been translated into European languages.
For some UK vocabularies see
This includes an encoding of the National Curriculum for schools in England organised into tagging terms (National Curriculum Specifiers) and into Programmes of Study and Schemes of work. This uses both keystages based on year groups and attainment level.
Also included are subject vocabularies used for various Higher ed and further ed projects (eg JACS, QCA, ACLearn, NLN) plus the Australian School thesaurus. And some vocabs for NDRB, a now defunct National Digital Resource Bank, including NDRB Learning Resource Type that resued some LOM and LRE terms.
For a set of Dutch education vocabularies see
So there are already several stabs at learningResourceType and a few for interactivityType amongst other things.
people are the network
|Fleshing out enumerations (was Re: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st)||Greg Grossmeier||2/2/12 10:37 AM|
<quote name="Kurt Bollacker" date="2012-01-31" time="15:51:14 -0800">
You are exactly right.
I have filled out this page with content that is basically what we have
> Similarly, I thought we would generate a richer list of suggested
I'm having a tough time generating the list of learning resource type
RE: interactivityType, I updated that page as well:
|Re: LRMI Version 0.7: Open Comment period ends January 31st||Greg Grossmeier||2/2/12 10:40 AM|
Thanks much, Mike!
I'll take a look at those and see what concepts make sense in the LRMI
All the best,
<quote name="Mike Collett" date="2012-02-02" time="12:14:59 +0000">