Comments on: A Giant EduGraph http://chnm2009.thatcamp.org/05/29/a-giant-edugraph/ The Humanities And Technology Camp Sat, 04 Jun 2011 13:00:14 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.12 By: patrickmj http://chnm2009.thatcamp.org/05/29/a-giant-edugraph/#comment-127 Tue, 02 Jun 2009 12:47:25 +0000 http://thatcamp.org/?p=70#comment-127 Eric,

Many thanks! I’m glad to hear that it seemed to work for your courses. That’s exactly the kind of feedback and discussion I’m hoping for at THATCamp (and in the blog).

The Work vs. Document distinction comes out of trying to make this play nicely with other ontologies out there, especially Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, where a Work is the high-level abstraction — like “Frankenstein” — and the Document (FRBR calls it a Manifestation) is the concrete publication.

yeah…I’m wrestling with the Tool vs. Practice distinction myself. Hopefully that can also make for good discussion.

]]> By: Eric Johnson http://chnm2009.thatcamp.org/05/29/a-giant-edugraph/#comment-126 Tue, 02 Jun 2009 04:10:18 +0000 http://thatcamp.org/?p=70#comment-126 This is great stuff, Patrick. I just wish I had more active semantic web know-how so I might have more immediately constructive comments along those related technical lines. But my reading of your initial vocabulary list is that it’s clearly got the highlights of what classes study–I just ran through a couple of my old courses in my mind to see if I could fit the subjects/approaches into your ontology and they worked quite nicely. It might even be possible to simplify slightly here and there–collapsing “document” and “work” into a single category, for instance (I’m not suggesting it necessarily needs to be done for those, just that it may be possible). And I keep looking at “tool” to see if it’s simply another form of practice, but I do see why they would be different. Is “concept” or “idea” something that would fit, or is that too nebulous?

In any case, I’m all for discussions of ways to formulate and visualize connections between related things–I look forward to more discussion!

]]>