Criteria page markup

[cmcavoy]

An issuer-client (indexer is the most obvious, there's probably more) needs to be able to grab some key information about a badgeClass that goes beyond the base specification:

• How to earn the badge
• A rubric that an assessor would use to assess completion of the criteria
• Time to earn
• Relation to other badges (prerequisites, placement on a learning pathway)
• Age range / skill level / prerequisite skills

OBr provides a lot of the above in the /v2/program/[shortname] feed, an example (the Mozilla Summit Toronto badge):

"mozilla-summiteer-2013-toronto": {

    "name": "Mozilla Summiteer 2013: Toronto",
    "shortname": "mozilla-summiteer-2013-toronto",
    "description": "The Mozilla Summiteer badge acknowledges attendance and participation at the Mozilla Summit 2013 in Toronto, Ontario.",
    "prerequisites": [ ],
    "image": "http://badger.openbadges.org/badge/image/mozilla-summiteer-2013-toronto.png",
    "criteria": "The Summiteer badge is a special edition badge created to acknowledge attendance at the 2013 Mozilla Summit. It is earned by working and sharing among peers at any one of three Summit locales—Santa Clara, Toronto, Brussels—during the 2013 Mozilla Summit.\r\n\r\nThis badge was earned at the 2013 Mozilla Summit in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.",
    "tags": [
        "attendance"
    ],
    "categories": [ ],
    "ageRange": [ ],
    "rubric": {
        "items": [
            {
                "text": "Satisfies the following criteria:\nThe Summiteer badge is a special edition badge created to acknowledge attendance at the 2013 Mozilla Summit. It is earned by working and sharing among peers at any one of three Summit locales—Santa Clara, Toronto, Brussels—during the 2013 Mozilla Summit.\r\n\r\nThis badge was earned at the 2013 Mozilla Summit in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.",
                "required": true
            }
        ]
    },
    "program": "1e4f3689c245070f39febe7f39ad4ede40e44c0e"

},

We want to preserve criteria pages as html, so they can continue to look cool...so the standard should probably be either RDFa, microformat, or something new and shiny I've never heard of.

[iamjessklein]

On a recent call @carlacasilli mentioned that she was thinking of engaging with the community of (rad)ical librarians on taxonomy. I wonder if this would be a good issue to have them chime in on?

[threeqube]

For discovery, discussing with @chloeatplay @carlacasilli and @emgollie potential of criteria page markup to help with algorithmic recommendations, remix/shuffle and other modes of discovery both deliberate and serendipitous.

[iamjessklein]

Can you say more? Are you thinking about the "tags" as a mechanism for recommendation or something else?

[threeqube]

Previously we had discussed recommending folks use LRMI to mark up their criteria pages so it becomes machine readable. So when criteria pages are machine readable, we can do something with that information.

Tags is one way, utilizing criteria page markup is another way to possibly make recommendations.

[xmatthewx]

LRMI is pretty interesting. It sets a lesson's context, but I'm not sure if it also goes into criteria & rubrics. I'd be curious to gather and review a random sampling of criteria/rubrics to see how they might be abstracted for markup.

[cmcavoy]

LRMI is awesome, but it's more about marking up a resource instead of describing evaluation criteria in a really usable way. It's extensible though, so we can use it as a base and the add on. That's my read on it so far. On Nov 19, 2013 3:44 PM, "matthew w" notifications@github.com wrote:

LRMI http://www.lrmi.net is pretty interesting. It's sets a lesson's context, but I'm not sure if it also goes into criteria & rubrics. I'd be curious to gather and review a random sampling of criteria/rubrics to see how they might be abstracted for markup.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/mozilla/openbadges-discussion/issues/4#issuecomment-28838969 .

[carlacasilli]

Hey, unsure of the timing for gathering a group of librarians on this issue of taxonomy (but still love the idea! :books:). Will float this idea during our r/sd and community calls and most likely aim for a convening on this in the new year.

[kayaelle]

LRMI is a good place to start but as @cmcavoy suggests, not enough. We may want to look at other data that schema.org provides. Adding data to criteria urls is a useful and flexible way to include additional information to badges. It also will help with SEO of badges.

While I think it's a good way to supplement badges it can be a heavy overhead process for backpacks to run for every badge, may take longer for the community to adopt and implement. I've added a separate issue (#8) to suggest a flexible way to experiment with extending the BadgeClass (in addition to bulking up criteria pages).

[iamjessklein]

+1 to @carlacasilli recommendation on getting taxonomy experts input on this.

[cmcavoy]

Taxonomy would help for sure...

Would also like to get some input from semantic web minded folks. One of the goals of any markup we recommend is that it makes it more discoverable by standard search engines.

On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 8:31 AM, iamjessklein notifications@github.comwrote:

+1 to @carlacasilli https://github.com/carlacasilli recommendation on getting taxonomy experts input on this.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/mozilla/openbadges-discussion/issues/4#issuecomment-33692236 .

@chmcavoy http://twitter.com/chmcavoy http://lonelylion.com

[carlacasilli]

Hey friends,
Been thinking through this and will be using dbpedia as a rough taxonomy. Making headway on this and will share widely for feedback soon. Thanks! Also, do you know any semantic web minded folks?

[threeqube]

@carlacasilli I do. Ping me and I'll intro.

[timothyfcook]

Moving to archive.

Criteria are now embedded into the badgeClass https://github.com/openbadges/openbadges-specification/pull/99