From Xcri

Contents 1 TODO 1.1 Provider as venue 1.2 Should delta updates and the @recstatus attribute be defined in a separate profile rather than in the core spec? 1.3 the <identifier> element 1.4 Location 1.5 awardedBy and accreditedBy 1.6 Presentation Guidelines 2 Completed 2.1 Copyright 2.2 Conformance 2.3 Provider Guidelines 2.4 Description 2.5 Qualification 2.6 Level 2.6.1 the level element 2.7 Duration

[edit] TODO

[edit] Provider as venue

Uni of Southampton: We should tweak the provider definition so that it covers venue better. Alan Paull: "Providers are organisations or organisational sub-units, such as campuses or faculties, that offer one or more courses."

[edit] Should delta updates and the @recstatus attribute be defined in a separate profile rather than in the core spec?

Alan Paull: I think that this could get complex, because attributes and elements in respect of data maintenance ought to be intimately connected to the core elements. Also see discussion about recDateTime attribute at http://www.xcri.org/wiki/index.php/Talk:Delta_update_pattern .

[edit] the <identifier> element

Alan Paull: If more than one identifier is used, it must use an encoding scheme, which must have a namespace; this has to be declared through a schema. It would be useful to include a bit about how to do this, or to cover it in some way for common namespaces within the Terms schema.

Linked to the above, is there any reason why we wouldn't use the Dublin Core recommendation for the URI encoding scheme, so that we consistently use xsi:type (apart from the fact it's more verbose)? Like this:

Example:

<dc:identifier xsi:type="dcterms:URI">http://www.bolton.ac.uk/</dc:identifier>

[edit] Location

Alan Paull: Consider using the location structure in DCSF Business Data Architecture 2.10. This "provides a structure for holding data about locations of all types - ranging from GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION and POSTAL ADDRESS through to electronic addresses (TELEPHONE NUMBER, URL) and contact details". Could probably be handled as an extension of MLO, thereby maintaining conformance with both. It might enable an extension of 'venue' to 'learning channel', again meeting the BDA standard. That would help to resolve problems caused by some systems requiring a venue, even for presentations that are distance learning, online or 'client's premises'.

[edit] awardedBy and accreditedBy

Alan Paull: guidelines currently are 'literal' only. However, I think we're about to get more access to qualification and awarding body data automatically, so I would prefer to see this covered by organisation details if possible. That would allow us to capture identifiers (URI or other), so that XCRI-CAP could link more easily to emerging information sets about qualifications.

[edit] Presentation Guidelines

Absence of Venue: Where a venue is not specified, aggregators SHOULD interpret this as meaning that the provider address is the venue, and use its contact information for this purpose. Alan Paull: What do we do in cases where there is no venue, for example online or distance learning? I suspect that a more BDA-like Location structure would resolve this.

Determining uniqueness: Where a presentation does not contain an identifier, aggregators may need to construct presentation identifiers. It is recommended that presentations use a URL-formatted identifier where possible, following the scheme for the provider and course. E.g. "http://www.bolton.ac.uk/courses/1/2008-1" [Broken link]

Start dates : A presentation SHOULD include either a start element or a description of the frequency or start details of the course, or both. Alan Paull: We'll need somewhere to put startDetails; suggest a new element presentation.startDetails (simple textual description). Actually, Start can simply be a textual description according to the Temporal Elements definition so we're OK to use it for both actual dates and general information about start frequency. I've updated the guidelines accordingly. --scottwilson 20:22, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Completed

[edit] Copyright

Alan Paull: can xcri.org hold the copyright? xcri.org is not a legal body, I think. Copyright may have to reside with JISC or some such, though I'm not sure JISC is a legal body either? SW: I've changed (c) to University of Bolton as that is the holder of the support contract.

[edit] Conformance

Alan Paull: Consider adopting the same (or similar) meaning of conformance as in MLO-AD: ftp://ftp.cenorm.be/PUBLIC/CWAs/e-Europe/WS-LT/CWA15903-00-2008-Dec.pdf . DONE.

[edit] Provider Guidelines

Description: A Provider SHOULD have a description, generally a small amount of generic information about the provider. Alan Paull: I think 'SHOULD' is a bit strong. Most of the feeds I'm dealing with are courses with only minimal provider details. Suggest delete this.

Title: a Provider SHOULD have a title. Alan Paull: I suggest that this might read: "A provider SHOULD have a title, which SHOULD be the trading name of the organisation."

DONE

[edit] Description

Long descriptions: Aggregators may choose to truncate long descriptions. Alan Paull: are we able to say what 'long' means in this context? Otherwise this isn't very helpful. Could I suggest that anything longer than 4000 characters is long for this definition? DONE

[edit] Qualification

Definition: A qualification that can be obtained from completion of a course. Alan Paull: This is a horrible definition. Suggest return to the previous one (even if the new one is from MLO) - "A formal recognition of achievement or competence certificated by its awarding body that can result from studying a course." [NOTE: the MLO is littered with such poor definitions - I hope they can be revised before it's approved!] DONE

[edit] Level

I've removed this:

[edit] the level element

URI:mlo:level An account of the education level of the course.

[edit] Duration

Taking up Scott's point, I suggest that we adopt the following for duration:

<duration interval="P3Y">Three years</duration>

where the interval attribute is in ISO 8601 and is optional, the content is mandatory.

DONE