Thanks for the presentation earlier today! I had some reflections on the metadata that are being used in MoodleNet and wanted to put some thoughts here. Will be happy to elaborate more and to contribute of course.
- I see that you're using IEEE LOM and I was wondering if you're considering using other elements of LOM that could describe the educational aspects of each resource more (educational use, educational context, educational type, etc)
- I was also wondering how reuse and remix is documented in metadata. Can (as a user) copy a resource to my collection, creating a copy of the URL (if the resource is a URL) and add different metadata that describe its use? This would create a new resource essentially, but one that is linked to the original, showing the use and reuse of resources and also tracking how resources are being repurposed, etc. This concept was described in depth by David Massart and Elena Schulman some years ago, through ILOX (http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november10/massart/11massart.html) which is quite connected to the librarian domain and the FRBR
- And then, the Aggregation Level from IEEE LOM also brings into the discussion what was discussed in the call, about learning objects VS bigger aggregations of objects or even entire courses. Which would be interesting to see in MoodleNet, having different aggregation levels for resources.
I have been working with metadata for quite some time and I do appreciate how they can intimidate people and how this needs to be kept to a minimum on a UI/UX level, to avoid overwhelming data curators, but on the other hand, metadata can support some very interesting functionalities/features if done right.
Tried to keep this post to a minimum but I am always happy to carry on with the discussion.