Re: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@rsicms.com>]

As JoAnn says, the subcommittee is not responsible for any implementation.
However, John Hunt, with some refinement from me, did implement a sample
SCORM output process, but it was never intended for production use and
it’s aged a good bit now.

I’ve started working on a standalone PowerPoint generation project, The
Slidinator (https://github.com/drmacro/slidinator), that is intended to
provide slide-style outputs from DITA, including learning content. It’s
still very much an alpha project but what’s there does work as far as it
goes.

I’ve done work, mostly through RSI Content Solutions, to render L&T
assessments into print and online formats and some of that is captured in
the DITA for Publishers projects.

There’s certainly much more that could be done to support L&T-specific
processing but the implementation is going to be driven by community and
client requirements.

Cheers,

Eliot
--
Eliot Kimber
Senior Solutions Architect
"Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
Main: 512.554.9368
www.reallysi.com
www.rsuitecms.com




On 1/21/14, 12:01 PM, "JoAnn Hackos" <joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com> wrote:

>Hi Doug et al.
>
>
>The DITA OT is not a part of the DITA standard and specification. It is a
>separate project under the guidance of Robert Anderson from IBM and Jarno
>??, programmer in Finland.
>
>
>It also does not include, at the moment, any improvements to the
>out-of-the-box stylesheet, which does not fully support the DITA 1.2 L&T
>specification. If we want to improve the stylesheets, we probably need to
>set up a crowd-funding project so that we
> can pay for time to work on it. Otherwise, you have to do your own work.
>
>
>JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD
>President
>Comtech Services Inc.
>710 Kipling Street, Suite 400
>Denver, CO 80215
>Joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com
>303-232-7586
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>CIDM will be hosting the Content Management Strategies/DITA NA Conference
>2014 in Seattle, Washington April 28-30. More information at:
>http://www.cm-strategies.com/2014/index.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From: <Burgess>, Doug <doug.burgess@sap.com>
>Date: Tuesday, January 21, 2014 at 8:38 AM
>To: "amber@ditastrategies.com" <amber@ditastrategies.com>, "'Sandra
>Durham (sdurham)'" <sdurham@cisco.com>,
> "Myers, Mark" <mark.myers@sap.com>, "john_hunt@us.ibm.com"
><john_hunt@us.ibm.com>, 'Eliot Kimber' <ekimber@rsicms.com>
>Cc: "dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org"
><dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org>, "Gemmell, Jennifer"
> <jennifer.gemmell@sap.com>
>Subject: RE: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>
>
>Hi All,
>
>A question: does the creation or specification of new delivery formats
>fall under the mandate of the L&T subcommittee? It sounds like DITA-OT
>work.
>  Where does the L&T subcommittee’s work end and OT development work
>begin?
>
>Best Regards,
>Doug
>
>=======================================
>Doug Burgess
>Business Platform Management and Operations
>Knowledge & Enablement Solutions, SAP Canada
>doug.burgess@sap.com
>Work: 604-974-2334 Mobile: 778-840-8004
>Vancouver BC
>Canada
>
>
>From:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org
>[mailto:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org]
>On Behalf Of Amber Swope
>Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 12:11 PM
>To: 'Sandra Durham (sdurham)'; Myers, Mark;
>john_hunt@us.ibm.com <mailto:john_hunt@us.ibm.com>; 'Eliot Kimber'
>Cc: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org; Gemmell, Jennifer
>Subject: RE: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>
>
>Thanks for the input, Sandra.
>
>The TC is still wrapping up DITA 1.3 and I’m not sure how quickly we can
>move on the educational support. I can tell you that you may want to wait
> until DITA 1.3 is available for adoption for your project due to some of
>the support improvements it contains.
>
>Have a great day,
>Amber
>
>From: Sandra Durham (sdurham) [mailto:sdurham@cisco.com]
>
>Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 12:27 PM
>To: amber@ditastrategies.com; 'Myers, Mark';
>john_hunt@us.ibm.com; 'Eliot Kimber'
>Cc: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Gemmell, Jennifer'
>Subject: Re: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>
>
>Coming in as a newbie here.
>
>
>
>We have a similar set of deliverables for formal certification-based
>training content as Mark described for SAP.  We are currently in a
>proprietary XML solution,
> but need to investigate DITA 1.2 as a possible migration path to a
>standards-based solution.
>
>
>
>Our training outputs include:
>
>
>* Instructor material (slides, pdf, and possibly epub in the future)
>* Student material (pdf, epub, and elearning selfstudy)  -these make
>extensive use of labs, selfstudy questions, etc.
>
>
>
>We do have formal learning objectives but our assessments are handled
>separately (not part of our XML-authored content).
>
>
>
>
>
>Sandra Durham
>
>Content Architect, Learning @ Cisco
>
>1414 Mass Ave | Boxboro, MA  01719
>
>phone: 978 936-2196
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From:
>Amber Swope <amber@ditastrategies.com>
>Organization: DITA Strategies, Inc.
>Reply-To: "amber@ditastrategies.com" <amber@ditastrategies.com>
>Date: Monday, January 6, 2014 4:52 PM
>To: "'Myers, Mark'" <mark.myers@sap.com>, "john_hunt@us.ibm.com"
><john_hunt@us.ibm.com>, 'Eliot Kimber' <ekimber@rsicms.com>
>Cc: "dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org"
><dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org>, "'Gemmell, Jennifer'"
><jennifer.gemmell@sap.com>
>Subject: RE: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>
>
>Hi there,
>
>It is a new year and perhaps time to reconsider the requirements in this
>space. The thread indicated that folks see the need for more support. Here
> are my initial thoughts on how to get started:
>
>1.
>Can this be part of the existing L&T subcommittee work? I think we can
>position it to be the natural evolution of the subcommittee,
> which means that we can simply define our goals for the next
>specification update and start working on it.
>2.
>Given the different focus, I think it would be appropriate for us to
>attempt to include more folks with instructional design and LMS-delivery
> backgrounds. Do folks agree? If so, then how do we find these people?
>
>My apologies for the delayed response…the DITA 1.3 work and my work
>scheduled took precedence over future planning.
>
>Have a great day, A
>
>From:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org
> [mailto:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org]
>On Behalf Of Myers, Mark
>Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 12:56 PM
>To: amber@ditastrategies.com;
>john_hunt@us.ibm.com; 'Eliot Kimber'
>Cc: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org; Gemmell, Jennifer
>Subject: RE: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>
>
>Hi Amber,
>
>I’m definitely interested and have the same views as you expressed.
>
>
>In SAP, we are using DITA 1.2 extensively to create our training and
>education content. From a data modeling perspective, we found DITA 1.2
>Learning
> and Training spec to cover almost all our requirements.
>
>However, we did need to do extensive pipeline and style sheet development
>in order to produce the formal types of outputs you mention below
>including
> course outlines, SCORM e-learning courses for running on an LMS,
>instructor presentations, instructor and participant handbooks, and so
>on. In my opinion, it would be very beneficial for the adoption of DITA
>L&T to have an open source implementation to generate
> these types of outputs.  This would make the adoption of DITA for
>learning and education much easier.
>
>
>Jenn Gemmell and I presented a summary of our use of DITA 1.2 for
>education in our DITA NA conference presentation. She’s an instructional
>designer
> and has extensive hands-on experience in using DITA 1.2 for the
>development of learning content so I would like to involve her as well.
>We would be happy to discuss this topic in further detail.
>
>
>Regards,
>Mark
>
>
>
>Mark Myers
>Knowledge Transfer Architect, Production Platform Management and
>Operations
>Knowledge Productization Services
>SAP America, Inc.
>3999 West Chester Pike
>Newtown Square, PA 19073 USA
>T 1-610-661-5823
>F 1-610-661-5824
>M 1-484-802-1809
>
>
>
>From: Amber Swope [mailto:amber@ditastrategies.com]
>
>Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 3:07 PM
>To: john_hunt@us.ibm.com; 'Eliot Kimber'
>Cc: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org; Myers, Mark
>Subject: RE: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>
>
>Hi there,
>
>I know that we’re still wrapping up our DITA 1.3 work, but wanted to
>restart the conversation about what is next for the L&T support. In
>various meetings,
> there has been the suggestion that we start a separate effort for formal
>education support. I have multiple clients using the DITA L&T support and
>they fall into the following broadly defined categories:
>·
>knowledge transfer
>o
>goal: present information to pass knowledge
>o
>learning objective usage: no formal learning objective assessment
>requirements
>o
>delivery: information is presented with instructor-led session (in-person
>or remotely via Internet)
>o
>deliverables: slides
>·
>training
>o
>goal: train folks to perform certain tasks that correspond to specific
>learning objectives
>o
>learning objective usage: no formal assessment
>o
>delivery: information is presented with instructor-led session (in-person
>or remotely via Internet) or via downloadable webinars
>o
>deliverables: slides; maybe some student materials and/or instructor
>guide; exercises
>·
>education
>o
>goal:  teach students formal curriculum that corresponds to specific
>learning objectives
>o
>learning objective usage: formal assessment with grading requirements
>o
>delivery: information is presented in many ways, including instructor-led
>session (in-person or remotely via Internet) using slides,
> via downloadable webinars, via LMS, …
>o
>deliverables: slides, LMS content, syllabus, student materials,
>instructor guide, tests, practice tests, course descriptions, compliance
> documents, question banks
>
>Do other folks have a similar understanding of this space? If not, how is
>your experience different?
>
>My experience is that with the DITA 1.3 updates, we can meet the majority
>of the needs for the first two groups, but the education folks need more
> formal support. Is anyone else interested in working on this more formal
>support? If so, how is the best way to do this?
>
>Thanks, A
>Amber Swope
>dita specialist
><dita strategies>
>503.922.3038
>amber@ditastrategies.com <mailto:amberswope@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>From:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org
> [mailto:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org]
>On Behalf Of john_hunt@us.ibm.com
>Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 10:52 AM
>To: Eliot Kimber
>Cc: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org; Myers, Mark
>Subject: Re: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>
>Hi Eliot, Mark, all -
>
>Thanks, Eliot, for digging out that 2005 paper, which did inform a good
>part of the initial OASIS discussions about the L&T specialization.
>
>We had quite a bit of discussion in the sub-committee about additional
>topic types for practice, exercises, labs, and so forth. In good part
>because there were quite a few variants
> of this kind of content, we ultimately resolved that for the general
>spec, we'd include just the single learningContent type, intended as a
>general vehicle for all types of learning content.
>
>That said,  I'd say that learningContent is intended also as a vehicle
>for further specialization, as might be needed for specific purposes,
>such as the one you bring up for
> learningPractice.
>
>But your reply also brings up the issue of what base type to
>specialization from. For learningContent, we chose "topic" to make it as
>generic as possible, since learning content
> might be task, concept, or reference, not just task. And of course, this
>poses a dilemma for learningPractice, which quite frankly we did not
>resolve in those earlier discussions about the learningContent type. If
>you want a learningPractice topic that specializes
> from task, you would not be able to specialize from learningContent.
>You'd need to specialization a new branch off of task.
>
>The other angle here is that we enabled learningContent to include nested
>topics of other types, including task, concept, and reference. This
>enables you to create a learning
> content topic with an intro and learning objectives and other
>learning-specific elements, and then deliver the content itself as a task
>or concept, but in the context of those learning objectives. It looks
>like this is the approach SAP has taken in their solution.
>
>Perhaps this is a topic to revisit post-1.3.
>
>John
>
>___________________________________
>John Hunt, Chair OASIS DITA Learning and Training sub-committee
>Senior Technical Content Architect
>IBM Collaboration Solutions | User Experience: Design and Information
>Excellence
>4205 S. Miami Blvd, Durham, NC 27703
>john_hunt@us.ibm.com
>
>
>
>From:        Eliot Kimber <ekimber@rsicms.com>
>To:        "Myers, Mark" <mark.myers@sap.com>,
> "dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org"
><dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org>
>Date:        06/10/2013 10:10 AM
>Subject:        Re: [dita-learningspec] RE: Whither learningPractice?
>Sent by:        <dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org>
>________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>I was actually looking for the topicref, not necessarily a topic type,
>although I kind of expected the topic type.
>
>I think it makes sense to use task as a base. If memory serves now that I
>think about it, one of my arguments for relaxing the task model in 1.2 was
>to enable construction of exercises that were not formal lists of steps,
>but
>just a description of what to do.
>
>I think I would still want to specialize from task to make an exercise
>topic
>and be able to do things like name the substeps "exerciseSolution" or
>similar.
>
>Cheers,
>
>E.
>
>On 6/10/13 9:36 AM, "Myers, Mark" <mark.myers@sap.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Eliot,
>>
>> I can't speak about the learningPractice, that discussion predates my
>> involvement with the SC.
>>
>> I can offer a recommendation though based on SAP's approach. We also
>>need to
>> create exercises and solutions in our training content. We use the task
>> element. We specialized it as "Exercise" but otherwise it is just like
>>task.
>>
>> We have authors write the tasks using the steps element to contain
>>general
>> instructions and the substeps element to contain the detailed
>>step-by-step
>> actions a user would take to complete the general instructions.
>>
>> So for example, general instruction go here:
>>
>> /learningContent/task/taskbody/steps/step
>>
>> The detailed action a user needs to do to complete that instruction go
>>beneath
>> the step in a substeps element like this:
>>
>> /learningContent/task/taskbody/steps/step/substeps/substep
>>
>> When we publish our handbooks, we publish each task twice: first
>>labeled as an
>> "exercise" which includes the steps and omits the substeps, the again
>>labeled
>> as a "solution" which include both the steps and substeps.
>>
>> I attached a screen shot from our instructor handbook as an example.
>>
>> We also follow this approach for learning assessments, we publish once
>>with no
>> answers indicated and then again with the answers indicated.
>>
>> If you want to see the sources or other examples just let me know.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> Mark Myers
>> Knowledge Transfer Architect, Production Platform Management and
>>Operations
>> Knowledge Productization Services
>> SAP America, Inc.
>> 3999 West Chester Pike
>> Newtown Square, PA 19073 USA
>> T 1-610-661-5823
>> F 1-610-661-5824
>> M 1-484-802-1809
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org
>> [mailto:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf
> Of Eliot Kimber
>> Sent: Sunday, June 09, 2013 3:18 PM
>> To: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org
>> Subject: [dita-learningspec] Whither learningPractice?
>>
>> I notice that John Hunt and Robert Bernard's 2005 paper
>> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-dita9a/
> includes a
>> "learningPractice" topic type (or, more generally, major section of a
>> course, parallel with learningOverview, learningSummary, etc.)
>>
>> However, we don't have a learningPractice topic type or map type in the
>>1.2
>> L&T specialization.
>>
>> Was that a deliberate decision or does the 2005 paper reflect later
>>thinking
>> after the 1.2 L&T design was finalized?
>>
>> I'm looking for how to organize "exercises" for an instructor-led
>>course and
>> learningPractice is just the thing.
>>
>> Of course, I can create my own specializations but I was curious as to
>>why
>> there's no obvious accommodation for exercises in the 1.2 L&T design.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> E.
>>
>> --
>> Eliot Kimber
>> Senior Solutions Architect, RSI Content Solutions
>> "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
>> Main: 512.554.9368
>> www.rsicms.com
>> www.rsuitecms.com
>> Book: DITA For Practitioners, from XML Press,
>> http://xmlpress.net/publications/dita/practitioners-1/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>>
>
>--
>Eliot Kimber
>Senior Solutions Architect, RSI Content Solutions
>"Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
>Main: 512.554.9368
>www.rsicms.com
>www.rsuitecms.com
>Book: DITA For Practitioners, from XML Press,
>http://xmlpress.net/publications/dita/practitioners-1/
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>
>