cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: [RT] Improved navigation of learning objects
Date Mon, 13 Oct 2003 12:51:27 GMT

On Monday, Oct 13, 2003, at 07:48 Europe/Rome, Andreas Hochsteger wrote:

> Hi Stefano!
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > The approach above works but it requires two operations:
> >
> >  1) creation of the LO
> >  2) connection of the LO in the linkmap
> Can you explain to me, why you are always talking from learning  
> objects in this context?
> Isn't a learning object a bit too specific to be used as a general  
> term?
> Here's a list of documents which might be published on the Cocoon  
> website with a classification if LO is suitable or not:
> * HOWTOs (LO fits)
> * FAQs (LO fits)
> * Tutorials (LO fits)
> * Guides (LO fits)
> * References (LO fits?)
>   - Cocoon Component Reference
>   - Cocoon URI Reference
>   - Cocoon XML Schema Reference
> * News (LO doesn't fit)
> * Status information (LO doesn't fit)
>   - Changes, Todo, Planning notes, ...
> * Release notes (LO doesn't fit)
> * Event reports (LO doesn't fit)
> * Links (LO doesn't fit)
> * ... many more where LO would fit and not
> As far as I see it a document would still be the more generic term and  
> a LO a certain subclass of documents (HOWTOs, FAQs, Tutorials, Guides,  
> ...), where the user can really learn something.
> What do you think?

It's a matter of terminology and communicating with a intermediate  
natural language doesn't help, but I think that "learning" is the act  
of increasing (or modifying!) the state of your cognitive abilities  
(aka knowledge and ability to interoperate with your environment,  
physical and mental)

definitions of "learning object" are: 

I personally believe that e-learning (as much as web services) is just  
a marketing term to refer to something that we've been doing since the  
web was started.

anyway, it's a philosophical detail: I think everything that we have in  
our documentation is a learning object, but if you don't, it's not a  
problem and we can get back to call them "pages".

But it would feel strange, though, to have the "video" of Sylvain's  
presentation about woody called "page".

We could call them "resources" (just like the URI RFC does), but then  
we would have to distinguish between resources created for human  
consumption and resources created for machine consumption.

My definition of a learning object is: a particular kind of web  
resource created for human consumption that can be referenced directly  
or indirectly thru the cognitive contexts that it exposes.

I don't think anybody would agree with me on that. It's just my  
personal view of the matter (some people have a more restricted  
definition of what a learning object is) and I'm fine with any other  
terminology, as long as the functionality of indirect referencing is  
taken into account.


View raw message