1. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Content Specifications Update Wilbert Kraan Lorna M. Campbell CETIS

2. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IMS Content Packaging IMS in the process of maintaining Content Packaging v 1.1.3 specification. 1.1.4 maintenance release aims to rectify ambiguities and remove inconsistencies from 1.1.3. Will not add any new functionality. Functional issues will be addressed in a v 1.2 release.

3. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Issues identified 47 issues submitted to IMS by April 2004. 7 duplicate issues. 11 closed issues or comments. 17 editorial issues with no functional impact (1.1.4) 12 issues requiring new functionality (1.2) Majority of issues from CETIS CodeBashes and ADL PlugFests. All hard work done by Wilbert Kraan and Schawn Thropp.

4. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Critical issues 1.1.4 Clarification on the Length of the ‘href’ Attribute String. Scoping of Meta-data in a Content Package. The Usage of ‘xml:base’ in Sub-manifests. Improved Guidance on Merging Sub- manifests. Sub-manifest referencing using the element. Declaring all files in a Package's Manifest.

5. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Clarification on the Length of the ‘href’ Attribute String “When the ‘xml:base’ attribute is used then care must be taken not to exceed the length of any associated ‘href’. The maximum length of both ‘href’ and ‘xml:base’ is defined as 2000 octets. In cases where multiple ‘xml:base’ values need to be concatenated to create the full path then care must be taken to ensure that the total length does not exceed that of the ‘href’. If the path length is greater than 2000 octets then the system behaviour is undefined.”

6. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Scoping of Meta-data in a Content Package Metadata can appear in 5 places within a package: manifest, organization, item, resource, file. If desirable, each component, is described with a separate metadata instance. There is no assumption of inheritance from one component or metadata instance to another. Use of IEEE LOM is recommended.

7. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Usage of ‘xml:base’ in Sub-manifests xml:base is used to specify the base URI of a document in resolving relative URIs in links to external files. In the imsmanifest.xml file, internal and external references may be absolute or relative. Relative addresses can be prefixed by an xml:base attribute which allows both external and local base addresses to be specified. Relative URLs, in the absence of xml:base, are relative to the Package root (location of imsmanifest.xml).

8. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Improved Guidance on Merging Sub- manifests If the (sub)Manifest includes an, the root node of that organization shall merge with the that references the (sub)Manifest. If the same attribute is specified for both the and the it references, but with different values, the value defined for the referred manifest shall override the value defined for the referring. That is, child attributes take precedence over parent attributes. This behaviour is expected of the rendering of the navigation tree, but does not need to affect the XML of the manifest(s).

9. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Sub-manifest referencing using the element Following note added to Table 4.1 “This identifierref cannot reference an identifier in a sub-manifest.”

10. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Declaring all files in a Package's Manifest All files included in the package must be declared and referenced in the manifest when interchanging packages. Including files in a package that are not mentioned in the manifest can lead to problems when the package is imported into, run or re-exported from a receiving LMS or repository. This means, for example, that files such as web page 'spacer gifs' need to be declared as elements within the web page's element in the package's manifest.

11. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IMS CP 1.1.4 next steps “Summary of Changes” document circulated to IMS contributing members. Comments by 9th Sept. Public draft CP 1.1.4 published thereafter. No work started on CP 1.2. No progress in submitting CP to IEEE LTSC for standardisation.

12. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IEEE LTSC IEEE LTSC CMI group have been discussing the creation of a content aggregation standard for some time. Much of this drive coming from ADL SCORM community. Have looked at IMS CP, METS and MPEG 21 in the past. New content group provisionally titled Content Aggregation Model for Learning, Education, Training (CAMLET).

13. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IEEE LTSC CAMLET Vision 1: Create an abstract übermodel of IMS CP, MPEG 21 and METS, of which all these specs can be said to be compliant.

14. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IEEE LTSC CAMLET Vision 2: Define API like 'hooks' at three levels: “Simple boring inventory stuff”, e.g. IMS CP & identifiers. “Learning activity structure type stuff”, e.g. IMS CP & identifiers. “Generic extensions that regulate extra functionality”, e.g. IMS SS, LD and QTI v2 attributes. This would allow mixing and matching specifications and standards at the resource level, the learning activity structure and the runtime behaviour level independently. “Think CP resources plus Concept Maps plus LD.”

15. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IEEE LTSC CAMLET Vision 3: Create an abstract datamodel of the CMI/SCORM type…. … with a few other items thrown in.

16. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 IEEE LTSC CAMLET Vision 2 less popular than other options. Vision 3 is a good proposal but… should all 3 elements exist in a single standard? Also some debate as to whether it is IEEE’s business to create standards from scratch. Standards should be based on established practice. Watch this space…..

17. CETIS Educational Content SIG, Learning and Teaching Scotland, September 2004 Also on the horizon…Topic Maps Increasing interest in use of ISO Topic Maps standard for teaching and learning. Norwegian eStandards Project proposing to set up a Topic Map SIG, discussion forum and wiki http://topicmaps.estandard.no/http://topicmaps.estandard.no/ Possibility of hosting a joint meeting at some stage in future. See wiki for references and further details.