Presentation at MUPPLE workshop, September 2009, Nice, France

1. RDFa versus Microformats: Exploring the Potential for Semantic Interoperability of Mash-up Personal Learning Environments Vladimir Tomberg, Mart Laanpere Tallinn University, Narva mnt. 25, 10120 Tallinn, Estonia vtomberg@tlu.ee, mart.laanpere@tlu.ee

2. A Course as dynamic process Mash-up PLE have become a fast developing trend Course is not just a syllabus, it also involves various dynamic processes These processes can be described by way of metadata using

4. Learning goals

5. Schedule of learning activities (assignments, discussions)

6. Registered participants (teachers, students)

7. Different types of resources

9. Scenario Teacher publishes a Course’s information by using a web application — blog, wiki, forum or personal web site Information by means of mash-ups is delivered to learners

11. (meta)data about the course syllabus,

12. pre-requisite and target competencies,

13. amount of credits,

14. dates for start and end of the course,

15. the criteria and form of a final assessment,

17. Microformats HTML code: <a href = "http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" rel="license">cc by 2.0</a> In browser: cc by 2.0

18. Microformats Standard (X)HTML attributes 'class', 'rel' and 'rev' are used for metadata storing purpose Not standardized, but well specified and widely known Endless development Have no ontologies, formal descriptions or schemes

19. RDFa HTML code: <a rel="cc:license" href="http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/"> Creative Commons License </a> In browser: Creative Commons License

21. Uses 10 reserved tags, 5 of them from XHTML2

22. Can be applied for RDFa only to XHTML2, not for HTML, XHTML1

23. Mixing different namespaces in one document is possible, for example 'dc:' and 'cc:' simultaneously

25. Semantic Comparison

26. Application for educational needs

27. Implementation on Wordpress Vladimir Tomberg, Mart Laanpere Towards Lightweight LMS 2.0: A Blog-based Approach to Online Assessment, EC-TEL 2008 Maastricht, The Netherlands

28. Under development at present

30. Microformats

31. Good simplicity of adaptation to web;

32. Limited vocabulary for educational needs;

33. RDFa

34. More flexible and semantically rich;

35. Unclear prospect because XHTML2 developing is stopped