dita-learningspec message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: L&T Spec revisions on agenda 16 July 2009
- From: john_hunt@us.ibm.com
- To: "dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org" <dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:51:10 -0400
Dear DITA Learning and Training content
sub-committee,
In the past month or so, SC member Eliot
Kimber has suggested a few spec revisions for us to consider, based on
his recent experience using and implementing the draft DITA 1.2 Learning
and Training specification.
Here's my summary of the three proposals
Eliot has suggested in the email exchange, plus my comments.
These are on the agenda for discussion
and consideration at the upcoming SC meeting on Thursday, July 16, 2009.
In considering these proposals, I think
we do need to take into account the fact that a number of vendors and OASIS
members have implemented draft support for the 1.2 specs, including the
Learning and Training spec. So, any changes we consider need to be sensitive
to the impact on this community.
1) LearningBase
Requires learningBasebody: Should be optional (E.
Kimber)
See this email thread - http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita-learningspec/email/archives/200906/msg00008.html
Proposal: Make the specialized body
elements optional in each of the 5 learning topic types, plus the learningBase
type.
John Hunt comment:
This can probably be defended as a fix,
since with DITA 1.1, body is optional in the base topic types.
2) Design of Learning Map Topicrefs:
Why NoSubordinate Refs? (E. Kimber)
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita-learningspec/email/archives/200907/msg00006.html
Proposal: Extend each of the specialized
learning topicref's to allow nested topicref's of the same type and to
set chunk to "to-content" by default.
a) set default for all learning topicrefs of chunk="to-content"
b) allow zero or more child elements of same specialize ref type. For example,
for learningPreAssessmentRef:
<!ELEMENT learningPreAssessmentRef ((%topicmeta;)?, (%learningPreAssessmentRef;)*)
John Hunt comments:
The current design places tight restrictions
on the learning map to force a flat structure for topics in a learningObject.
This is informed by restrictions and best practices for SCORM content.
In IBM pilot experiences with a variety
of learning and training content, after meeting some initial resistance,
the topicref restriction has not been a problem.
Is this restriction something we can
live with until 1.3?
3) Feedback for Matching Table Items
(E. Kimber)
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita-learningspec/email/archives/200907/msg00003.html
Request to add a feedback element for
specific lcMatchingPair items, in addition to the lcFeedback currently
allowed for the matching table as a whole.
John Hunt comment:
I hesitate on this one, too. The 7 interactions
in the learning domain really are a "starter set," and not expected
to meet all possible needs. And we have only limited experience with processing
for these interactions.
I suggest this also might be good to
defer to 1.3, and encourage Eliot and others to contribute additional interactions
as extensions to this domain in the meantime.
John
___________________________________
John Hunt
Chair, OASIS DITA Learning and Training Content sub-committee
IBM Software Group/Lotus Software
john_hunt@us.ibm.com
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]