LETSI TWG call, March 4, 2008

Attending: Avron, Frank, Neil, Valerie, Tyde, Wayne, Fanny, Don, Jinny

Wayne runs adl job performance lab. Expert on s1000D - used for tech pubs. Also expert on dita, a content format developed by oasis. They have produced a learning specialization.

Next week is S1000D mtg in dc. 90 min sess devoted to Letsi and s1000D profile. Saab, airbus will be there. They have approved trng and learning support. Aerospace industry assoc.

     1. Roll Call
     2. Review/Approve Agenda
     3. Review/Approve 20080219 WG Minutes
     4. General LETSI news

IMS has issued a legal challenge against LETSI. Not clear what the consequences are. Issued in parallel with letter to SC36. LETSI had requested liaison status. IMS sent a letter that shows a total lack of decorum. They arguied laison relationship could not be approved bc IMS has issued a legal challenge. They add that IMS has a lot fo money and letsi does not. There were other comments warning people not to associate with letsi given ambiguaous nature, indicating there may be a conflict since letsi secretariat works for eduworks. The reason this is a problem, they have been trying to get a study group in SC36 for 2 years to discuss scorm. There are 25 people from about 20 countries that plan toi participate. The topic is core scorm. If core scorm were mentioned in the legal challenge, it would make it inappropriate to talk to ims in public until we figure out what the issue is. IMS will be at the meeting, as will tyde, adl, aicc, ieee, Fanny who is involved in letsi. Creates a situation where it is not c;lear if this meeting can occur - conversation about the topic is not approp with IMS. SC36 is concerned about ims. Tyde has a call to discuss what remedial action they will take with ims. ADL could terminate its liaison rel with sc36 if remedial action does not occur. The legal challenge has taken much of tydes time. It will have implications for the letsi meeting in Seoul, too. SC36 has been warned that there is a legal issue and they should stay away. It's disruptive.

V asked about decision path. Tyde commented that the challenge was made to IEEE iSTO, our host org. It came from a law firm they know of. ISTO had a meeting of board of directors to figure out if there are macro issues. They have decided to respond. They've drafted a letter to the IMS law firm. The letter will say please be more specific. That's where we are at. We will see what happens next.

Avron added that ISTO is responding to legal inquiry about who owns scorm. IMS claims to own it, that seems to be the basis. SC36 is another matter. SC36 matter needs to address the legal threat there. There is another alternative to SC36 to get core scorm through ISO, and they are exploring that. They will achieve getting core scorm into some official iso status. That was what they really wanted to do. They gave sc36 and opportunity to work with letsi on that.

What to do about ims claims to scorm? Two approaches. They have letter allowing scorm to proceed through iso. Once that was received they dropped out. ADL will participate in challenge to IMS and a pr campaign. They will take the battle to IMS turf. They don't think IMS constituency will stand behind Rob. When they have wherewithal, they will go public.

Wayne asked how letsi should be presented to large orgs that could be future members. Avron commented they should talk about that separately.

V - sooner rather than later with ims.

W - they present themselves as the alternative Shepard of scorm. Welcome to join strategic comm. Working group and hash that out.

Tyde - the issue to do this is resources to do this on short notice. LETSI is just trying to get started.

     5. Discussion - S1000D Project
In last meeting he suggested parties who share interest might want to set up wiki pages for discussion. Wayne Gafford started doing that. He is part of ADL team, represents them on S1000D. He's interested in performance technologies. Neil represent AICC, he may be a target of collaboration. Jackie Haynes in T&L group mentioned that they have an S100D testbed; there is interest in that group getting involved as well.

Wayne commented that S100d came out of European aerospace industry. its prime characteristic Is that it broke tech data into indiv modules. One data module does not reflect an entire manual. It's a discreet chunk. There has been aproblem with learning content being behind schedule of system deployed. One reason is that during alifecycle, tech manuals would be completed, when learning community developed training, that put them a year behind state of the system they are teaching. Getting data current was an issue solved by ... since scorm has a gap on data and format, you can put tech data into flash and html with no metadata. Tech learning informantion could be put into s1000D. It is based on XML, has discreet naming convention, metadata, apply it within scorm. If you put every piece of content in S1000D, you have a common data format that enables web services to improve data management. The attributes scorm has are not evident in scorm and vice versa. S1000D does not have an api. Scorm does not have content markup. S1000D has an aggregation model and process data module, which acts as a sequencing device. There are attributes that if you combine them could serve as an uber spec that would be highly stylized for an industry segment that needs to manage documentation. This is a perfect storm for 2 standards to come together for greater efficienies. How can we create S1000D profile of scorm and encourage greater interop between learning and tech content.

     6. Discussion - Functionality Framework

In last meeting Clark Christiansen came up with functionality framework that people seem to like. Tyde put something up on wiki to capture that and get people to comment. He has done that, but he hasn't encouraged comment yet. It is there now. Next Thursday there is a face to face meeting in Korea. He'd like to discuss there, go over comments received to see if they can produce next iteration. IEEE LTT provided a set of standards they think would be relevant to scorm as it moves forward. It would be an interesting exercise to see how they fit into this model. There are a handful of standards form sc 36 that might fit, too. There are IEEE standards for lom and xml binding, api, data model, xml binding, reusable comp definitions, trial standard for digital rights expression languages. They are on the table. Two SC36 cares about are accessibility and quality. That might be useful exercise for meeting. Help us define func framework, see how existing standards might fit in.

W - if someone were to ask what are some of the learning based standards other than what goes into scorm, would a likely answer be the list tyde just gave. Tyde said yes. W - are there any others assoc to pure instruction or instructional design, learning theory? Tyde said no. If you mean something produced by an accredited standard, there are no formal standards related to learning theory or instructional design. Many see it as an art and difficult to represent, or so many variations, difficult to make a general solution.

W - is this in the context of a core scorm? T - it's an approach for scorm as it evolves.

Frank - clark took known three pieces of functionality. There's a lot more to the outline that needs to be flushed out. Clark wanted consensus on outline. Tyde confirmed that; he hasn't made further progress. Avron added this is the second iteration and fairly complete.

     7. Discussion - IEEE/ISO

There is a document in attachements. The reason ADL went to sc 36, ADL has had a four step model that included a path to ISO. IEEE standards and ISO is not so much the process as who gets to vote. In ISO its national bodies. ADL made a commitment to get scorm through ISO in an appropriate way to support the stewardship goals. At an open meeting on the stewardship of scorm, all agreed a steward of scorm should be established. SC36 rep said that you must involve sc36. In many countries, that enables this to be used. The assumption has been that things need to move into ISO IEC. That has been a dofficult thing to do to date. ISO and IEEE have tried to work together but have not succeeded in doing so. A new partnership arrangement between IEEE and ISO where IEEE standards can be fast tracked; other collab arrangements cann be pursued. One area called out is sc36. It's now appropriate to introduce ieee standards to sc36. Important because most of standards scorm uses are ieee standards. He will mention at sc36 study group meeting. LTSC meets in april;. Tyde has requested a 2 day workshop on core scorm, seeing if they can make a proposal there.

Frank asked how IMS and mpeg 21 would come into play. Tyde explained they are separate issues. This doesn't impact ims at all. Frank asked if it impacts which we choose. Tyde said given the relationship with ims, its difficult to see how they can move forward until there is a happy reunion. IMS content packaging is not an intrinsic part of the moel, but people have implemented it. He is doubtful that standardizing content packaging will work out. Ltsc has been working on ramlat. Facilitate mapping in a formal sense.  Could be the way aggregation is resolved. Which approach you take would be up to you. If you want de jure standard, mpeg 21 is available. We need to sort out licensing arrangements required. That needs to be resolved. RAMLAT, there is a standard on the horizon to define the relationship. Frank asked Tyde to post something on ramlat. For industry, choosing the aggregation piece is an implementation/ community of practice issue.

Jinny asked what is being done to move this forward. Tyde said we have to confirm with robby they can have such a workshop and put it on the agenda. The ADL TWG may comment on it. We could have a comment period of a couple months. The first thing is to request agenda time. One outcome would be to understand how this would fit within IEEE framework. Jinny suggested getting together to figure out next step to getting on agenda. Tyde asked fanny for her opinion. She doesn't understand what everyone is saying. Tyde summarized. Collaboration w/IEEE LTSC under new isto arrangement is one. What Jinny was talking about is IEEE standard for ECMA communication model. People have wanted a web service approach to that model. Jinny has developed a web service alternative that closely maps to the standard. The standard is up for 5 year maintenance review. She would like to add web service as annex to the standard. Fanny confirmed that they took such an approach to the lom. Possible, but have to identify working group that has developed it. When they know the group, have some people willing to work on amendment, then no problem. LTSC meeting in april in dallas. Tyde will talk to Robby about the meeting. Tyde asked who is hosting. Skills net, Michael Brown is hosting. Tyde agreed there needs to be discussion about introducing meeting to the agenda. They need to sort through the scheduling implications. Jinny said it sounds like we have the opportunity to take action now. What about ltsc as lead on standardization activity for core scorm? Fanny - IEEE will be glad to do it with support of adl. Jinny - what you think is best way to go. Tyde - they don't seem to get things done. His opinion that what ltsc produces are specifications. SC36 has two separate activities related to lom. They call it MLR, theydon't talk to IEEE about it. To advance things quickly,

What flag is being transferred? Tyde - keeping lfag that is already there. The things that constitute scorm considered as a whole. Scorm builds upon aicc cmi model. Aicc submitted that to ieee ltsc in 1997. That delimits a tech scope. Includes aggreg, competencies, sequencing, runtime communications. ADL participated in ltsc, and it became CMI scorm. They were waiting for submission of IMS packaging. It's possible to revive group. The spec outlines capabilities to address, a number have been, its possible to act and move forward with the entire set. The assumption was next step being transferred to sc36. Has proved difficult. It's possible for a single party to delay things and get it off track in sc 36. Seems sensible to do things there. Already agreed upon scope. Frank - makes sense politically. Technically, likes content aggregation approach.

     8. Discussion - Korea and SC36

Full day of sc36 meetings March 16. That is supposed to be a study group to evaluate core scorm proposal. They are proceeding as if meeting will go forward. Tyde will talk to sc36 chair to figure out implications of ims actions. Thursday and Friday there will be a letsi meeting, Tech roadmap session. Friday a full day open forum on ADL and electronic textbook tracks. IMS common cartridge relevant to the textbooks.

     9. WG infrastructure (wiki, email reflector)

Wiki looking better. Avron added that the welcome page, they are making it look like a real website.

   10. Day/Time Next Meeting

Normally would be 18th. That's in the middle of sc36. Or we could cancel it. Avron - would be good to report on Sunday's meeting. Plan on meeting occurring. If it's a problem, he will let us know.

   11. Adjourn