The LOM RDF binding update 20030619

1
The LOM RDF binding- update 2003-06-19

• Mikael Nilsson
• mini_at_nada.kth.se
• The Knowledge Management Research Group
• Centre for user oriented IT design
• Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm
• http//kmr.nada.kth.se

2
Overview

• Use cases of LOM/RDF
• XML binding compatibility issues
• Status of the binding
• Summary

3
Use cases 1 UR(Swedish educational broadcasting
company)

• Largest content producer in Sweden (state owned)
• 3000 TV/Radio programs since 2001 (30,000 since
  1970), plus books, web sites, etc.
• 50 every week
• Online archive of digital versions since
  February
• http//www.ur.se (in Swedish...)

4
UR Web
5
UR Metadata

• 4 application profiles (program, series, texts,
  websites)
• Several vocabularies
• DC (title, description, subject, relation, etc.)
• DC Qualifiers (medium, MIME type, W3CDTF...)
• LOM (difficulty, location, annotation,
  requirements..)
• UR specific (accessibility, licenses,
  participants)
• IMS content packaging

6
UR Metadata refinements

• Refinements for e.g.
• identifiers (4-5 types in use in parallel at UR)
• annotations (internal and external)
• descriptions (different kinds for different
  purposes)
• language (spoken/subtitles)
• Vocabularies for
• audiences, types, media carriers, including
  refinements of DC LOM vocabulary.

7
UR features

• Easily modifiable metadata set, and easily
  configurable editor. Without disturbing, we can
• add fields
• refine fields and values
• add vocabularies
• Supports cross-search with DC/DCQ repositories.
  Demonstrated yesterday at UR
• UR, OAI, Swed. Agency of Education, digital
  portfolios

8
Use case 2 Edutella

• P2P network for metadata exchange
• http//edutella.jxta.org
• Supports any RDF metadata
• Scenarios
• Search for nuclear physics material (DC, DCQ)
• Search for learning material for primary school
  on nuclear physics (LOM)
• Search for courses including a certain piece of
  content (IMS CP)
• Search for annotations/opinions on this course.

9
Use case 3 RSS feeds

• Rich Site Summary 1.0 based on RDF and DC
• http//purl.org/rss/1.0/
• Stephen Downes' RSS/LOM module
• http//www.downes.ca/xml/RSS_LOM.htm
• The RSS-LOM Module provides translation from
  IEEE-LOM to RSS 1.0 to allow learning object
  repositories to syndicate listings and
  descriptions of learning objects.
• An RSS feed provided by a learning object
  repository is harvested by a metadata repository
  and aggregated with feeds from other learning
  object repositories.
• These aggregated feeds are then made available
  as a searchable resource, the links provided
  ultimately pointing to the learning objects
  provided by the original learning object
  repositories.

10
RSS/LOM example (extract)

• 0-226-10389-7
• Sample Learning Object
• en
• A sample learning object metadata
  file in RSS
• psychology
• 1776-07-04
• Atomic
• 13
• beta
• final
• National Research
  Council
• Rod Savoie
• Stephen Downes
• OMv1.0"/
• text/html
• Multi-OSingSystem
• NetscapeCommunicator
  4.7
• PT1H20M
• ActivetivityType

11
RDF XML issues (for the BRG)

• Metadata term URIs
• LOM/XML has them, LOM/RDF has them
• How to sync LOM/XML LOM/RDF wrt CORES?
• Vocabulary term URIs
• Ability to give URI for a term. Needed in RDF
• For LOM vocab URIs for LOM vocabulary values
• For local vocab vocabulary XML format?
• LOM extensions are format specific
• Need to make this clear in the LOM/XML spec

12
RDF binding status

• Most details resolved in the direction of
  simplification
• Ballot-ready in principle
• Binding is not perfect, but given the contraints
  we have, it's as good as it gets
• Goal Yes, you can use RDF and be
  LOM-compatible. Here's how to do it
• This goal is achievable with the current binding
• See http//kmr.nada.kth.se/el/ims/md-lomrdf.html

13
Future

• Next-generation LOM visions
• allows for semantic extensions
• plays nicer with other vocabularies
• fits better into RDF world
• in short better knowledge representation
  capabilities
• The RDF binding work shows many of the problems
  and possibilities
• will help inform LOM 2.0.

14
Issues for LOM 2.0

• The issue of semantic (not structural) extension
• Subclasses, Subproperties, Element encodings
• This needs a meta-model for metadata.
• DC has one element, element refinement,
  element encoding).
• LOM has one element sub-element, etc
• RDF is a meta-model. DC is compatible, LOM is
  not. LOM's metamodel is insufficient for dealing
  with semantic extension
• As LOM is structured, not flat Needs conceptual
  modeling more than DC. What are objects, what are
  relations?