[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita-learningspec] learning maps questions
Where do you recommend to locate the <xref> element? I think the issue is complicated because all of the different topic types: · Learning topics: within <lcObjective> or <prolog><data>? · Non-learning topics: within <prolog><data>?
Thanks, A
From: Eliot Kimber [mailto:ekimber@contrext.com]
Yes, #6: xrefs from learning objects or assessments to the objectives that apply to them.
It makes sense to have things point to their objectives, it does not make sense to have objectives point to the things (because the set of things is potentially unbounded but for any thing the set of objectives is both finite and small).
Cheers,
E.
From: Amber Swope <amber@ditastrategies.com>
Can you please explain your xref option to me? I thought you were suggesting #6 below…
As usual, the issue isn’t that there aren’t options on how to do it in DITA…but rather how to select the best option. Thanks, A
From: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Eliot Kimber
I assumed that explicit pointing from objectives to the things to which they applied would never be the right answer.
Also, I only think of related links as something that is generated based on relationships established in maps, so it would never occur to me that it could be an option.
Cheers,
E.
From: Amber Swope <amber@ditastrategies.com>
See ARS note below
From: Amber Swope [mailto:amber@ditastrategies.com]
Thanks for the prompt response, Eliot.
One of my clients needed to support multiple learning objectives per module and to specify to which objective each content unit applied. They used subjectScheme to classify their learning objectives and define the key reference (using <subjectdef>) and then associated the objectives using <topicsubject> for each <topicref> as appropriate. For them the classification in the subjectScheme map was useful and worth the overhead. I agree that this might be a lot of overhead if you don’t need the classified objective list.
The goal is to clearly establish an association between a learning objective and its associated content, which could include any content type, but is required for assessment. Important considerations are:
Dawn and I advocate for creating each learning objective as a separate topic and the associating that topic with its related content. As for where the association occurs, I think we need to review the options. Here are the ones I’ve identified:
Benefits: can associate the same content to different learning objectives in different contexts if module supports only one objective, then can define once for entire module Considerations: Associate is context-specific and there is no easy way to find associated content in CCMS Must define key value for each objective in each module Cannot use learning maps (currently) Cannot easily see objective in context of the content (need to see the module map)
Benefits: Can define key values for objectives in one place an associate the same content to different learning objectives in different contexts If relationship changes, no impact on related topics Considerations: Associate is context-specific and there is no easy way to find associated content in CCMS Must define key reference for each objective in each module Cannot use learning maps (currently) Cannot easily see objective in context of the content (need to see the module map) Must maintain objective map
Benefits: Can classify objectives an associate the same content to different learning objectives in different contexts If relationship changes, no impact on related topics Considerations: Associate is context-specific and there is no easy way to find associated content in CCMS Must define key reference for each objective in each module Cannot use learning maps (currently) Cannot easily see objective in context of the content (need to see the module map) Must maintain subjectScheme map
Benefits: an associate the same content to different learning objectives in different contexts Can store relationship table in separate map and reuse in multiple modules Can use learning maps If relationship changes, no impact on related topics Considerations: Association is context-specific and there is no easy way to find associated content in CCMS Cannot easily see objective in context of the content (need to see the module map) Must maintain relationship table
Benefits: Can easily see objective in context of the content Can search in CCMS and find associated content Can use learning maps Considerations: Not easy to support associating the same objective in multiple contexts (all objectives associated in all contexts) Cannot include in non-L&T topics without specialization Must set value to instruct transform to not generate the objective content when topics are rendered If relationship changes, must check topic out and update
Benefits: Can easily see objective association in context of the content Can use learning maps Considerations: Not easy to support associating the same objective in multiple contexts (all objectives associated in all contexts) no easy way to find associated content in CCMS Must set value to instruct transform to not generate the objective content when topics are rendered If relationship changes, must check topic out and update ARS: I guess you have the reference from the objective to the related content (using <related-links>, but that means that you’d have to check out and update the objective file every time you needed to associate it…I don’t think that would be acceptable?
None of these options seems ideal; the big challenge is when you have the abstract association (options 1-4), there is no easy way to find all the related items.
Have a great day, A
From: dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Eliot Kimber
Looking at the content models of <learningPreAssessmentRef> and < learningPostAssessmentRef> it looks like the original design assumed there would not be a need for substructure, which seems rather short sighted looking at it now. I can assure you that I never gave it a moment’s thought during the original L&T development I was involved in.
I assume the purpose of the keydef here is to bind a key to the objective topic so it can then be referenced in order to associate it with the assessment referenced. If so, putting it inside the learningPreAssessmentRef would be rather odd practice—I’d expect that you would have a separate branch in the map that organizes all the objectives independent of any use of them. But it wouldn’t actually matter where the keydef went.
Using topicsubject is an interesting idea but I think it’s too tightly bound to subject schemes, which incurs a lot of overhead. But I think it would make sense to have a similar object-specific reference that means “this objective is an objective of the parent topicref’s referenced resource”.
Note that simply allowing <topicref> within these two topicref types would then allow both keydef and topicsubject to be used (once the classification domain was integrated into your map types).
If the requirement is to be able to associate objective *topics* with other topics in order to establish an “objective of” relationship between the objective topic and the other topic (presumably a learning object or assessment of some kind), then in addition to something analogous to topicsubject, there are only three mechanisms available within the DITA (that I can think of):
I’m not a big fan of subject scheme maps—I think using relationship tables would be more natural and obvious.
I think the xref approach is required regardless (basically giving you a replacement for the current in-topic objective lists or maybe simply a way to augment those lists with L&T-defined links to the objectives defined elsewhere).
Cheers,
E.
From: <dita-learningspec@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Amber Swope <amber@ditastrategies.com>
I’m working with Dawn on documenting ways to associate learning objectives and was trying to associate learning objectives to references in learning maps.
I tried to associate an objective with an assessment topic. However, the <learningPreAssessmentRef> and <learningPostAssessmentRef> elements do not allow <keydef> or <topicsubject>. They only support <learningGroup> and <learningObject>. It turns out that none of the learning reference elements allow <keydef> or <topicsubject>. Does this mean that there is no way to associate objectives at the referenced topic level in a learning map other than using relationship tables?
Was this intentional? If not, can we address this? Are there any other elements that we should consider allowing within the specialized learning referencing elements?
Thanks and have a great day, A
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]