http://fm.ea-tel.eu/flashmedia/flashmeeting/fm12501_70e9a8-12501 http://fm.ea-tel.eu/fm/memo.php?pwd=70e9a8-12501 http://fm.ea-tel.eu/public lom 0:5174:0 2:5190:0 3:5285:0 28:5184:0 185:5188:0 228:5180:0 4582:5199:0 4923:5339:0 hello, everybody! hello erik! let's do a quick round of introductions and hi to all OK but you can turn the webcam off ;-) that's ok we can close our eyes... my webcam is unfortunately in my other office hi andy hi dan hi Andy & Dan OK http://ariadne.cs.kuleuven.be/mediawiki/index.php/User:Rjgodoy/LCRC-reloaded only just seen this, hi to all would be good! yes thats a good idea i agree with Christian, they are not metadata The presentation and selection of learning objects through the LOM is very textual and lacks background and graphical information. Add elements to the General group for preview, more information, an "icon" representing the object etc. this has much more to do with systems that use lom and their interfaces and is not the business of this kind of metadata IMHO of course yes you are right! it is useful for interactive LOs too ... Comment:The value space for 4.4.1.2 is outdated and misses for example "firefox". For every new version of the standard this list will be outdated after a couple of years. Proposed Change:Change the datatype of 4.4.1.2 to CharacterString and move the text in the value space to the examples. browsers vocabulary (state) if Type= ?browser? then: any netscape communicator ms-internet explorer opera amaya I agree with Christian's suggested approach right no strong views except that issue needs consideration in LOMnext another reason: in the corrigenda, we tried not to break current conformant implementations i agree with the consensus agree with Javier easy to confirm Comment:This comments applies to all instances of maximum number of items shown in the Base Schema.The imposition of a maximum number of instances of an item is arbitrary and unnecessary. What is worse, is that specifying maxima acts as a serious limitation on the scalability of meta models. I cannot imagine any logical or technical reason to make these maxima reasonable.This caused me serious difficulties a few years ago when I was working on a large meta model and at the time I could see no sense in them. Proposed Change:Remove all maximum numbers of items from the components of the Base Schema. I agree with your interpretation i agree with what Erik said - in which case the comment is incorrect I think 4.5 is clear... In the LOMv1.0 base schema (see Clause 6), smallest permitted maximum values are defined for thefollowing:?aggregate data elements:All applications that process LOM instances shall process at least thatnumber of entries. In other words, an application may impose a maximum on the number of entriesit processes for the value of that data element, but that maximum shall not be lower than the smallestpermitted maximum value.?data elements with datatype CharacterString or LangString:All applications that process LOMinstances shall process at least that length for the CharacterString value (either directly or containedin the LangString) of that data element. In other words, an application may impose a maximum onthe number of characters it processes for the CharacterString value of that data element, but thatmaximum shall not be lower than the smallest permitted maximum value for the datatype of the dataelement.NOTES:1?The intent is for the smallest permitted maximum values to cover most cases.2?What ?processing? means in 4.5 depends on the nature of the application. I don't want to be the one causing long discussions one a relative small issue like this... programmers aren't known as the most carefull readers... Sounds good Dan http://ariadne.cs.kuleuven.be/mediawiki/index.php/User:Rjgodoy/LCRC-reloaded CMI Clause 4.6 Smallest permitted maximum values:This Standard defines smallest permitted maximum (SPM) values for data elements with data types that include bag, array, set, and characterstring. For these data elements, a receiving implementation or a repository implementation that conforms to this Standard shall accept and process at least that number of entries or characters specified by the SPM for the element and may accept and process a larger number. not yet no not yet thanks you Erik Hi tom hi Tom hi tom better late then never, hi Tom btw, when would we apply the changes to the current wiki page? Hello everyone. Good to rejoin this effort. ok i will attend remotely if it is possible I will try to attend remotely Probably not, but will try. Yes, will attend remotely I will try remotely in the US afternoons hello, i'm w/ CECIty.com a member of the LOM group I do not have a mic. I can get one. This mtg is recorded, correct? Thx! Thank you Erik!!! what is this mtg software; it's pretty interesting thanks, Erik, for leading the discussion! Thankyou Eirk bye bye to all Bye folks bye everybody! Thank you Bye bye bye bye all