Re: [school-discuss] Static vs dynamic EduML

["Douglas S. Blank" <dblank@brynmawr.edu>]

XIAO Gang said,

> Therefore, room should be reserved in the format of the (EduML?)
> exercises, to allow for definition of (at least) random parameter
> processing and multiple forms of input.

but I would state it even more strongly: 

It will be important to come up with a standard EduML definition that all can
use, but even more important to have a process by which changes and additions
can be quickly and effectively made.

This will involve the parsers being able to handle tags it wasn't designed for
(ignoring them at worst or dynamically looking for additional functionality
remotely at best). 

In some sense, the "final" EduML need not be agreed upon by everyone. If
someone needs another tag (field), they can add it. If others find it useful,
they can take advantage of it, else just ignore it.

Maybe a method of *decentralized* data definitions (DTDs) and well-defined
process of (automatic?) adaption is the way to go. 

One idea that could go hand-in-hand with this is to build into EduML the idea
of "executable content". For example, if one added a new tag, with it would
come a URL pointing to a definition of functionality. Or the tag could have
code associated with it (embedded in the EduML) to actually do the functions
associated with it.

-Doug

> 
> -- 
> 
> XIAO Gang (~{P$8U~})                          xiao@unice.fr
>                http://pcmath126.unice.fr/xiao.html
> 



-- 
Douglas S. Blank,       Assistant Professor         
dblank@brynmawr.edu,          (610)526-6501
Bryn Mawr College,  Computer Science Program
101 North Merion Ave,  Park Science Building
Bryn Mawr, PA 19010 dangermouse.brynmawr.edu