# Tectonic shift think tank/Tech requirements/Interoperability

## Contents

### Problems with SCORM

• almost unimplementable;
• too many variants on implementation on 'player' side.
• bells & whistles just don't work with any regularity => interoperability is actually broken.

### IMS Content Packaging

• lowest common denominator
• works on many systems
• lightweight
• nothing particularly educational about it IMS (ultimately a benefit)
• no support in MediaWiki

### Interoperability

• Support standards (XHTML,

### MediaWiki

• no support for packaging of any kind?
• wiki content(s) -> XML (in the works)

### eXe

• 2-way
• requires XML step

## From the community chatroom

<kevingamble> any discussion of openID and when we might see it?

<kim_register> I think several of the participants are from different platforms and projects
<kim_register> but it might be nice to have a small pilot project where several people work together
and can actually test to see if their systems are cooperating

<ChuckBearden> To what extent are interopability problems solved by open standards, whether data
standards (content and metadata markup, e.g.) or APIs?
<ChuckBearden> Are they enough to create interoperability?

<yeoman> have you thought about incorporating learning object metadata into mediawiki? (I've looked
into it) see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Learning_object_metadata ... that's the IEEE standard... I
think it's current.
<kevingamble> we wrote a LOM extension that maps the required Dublin Core metadata elements - so not
all of the elements. It works for our purposes.
<kevingamble> mapped them to the DC best we could. it wasn't a perfect fit. LOM actually was better
though. Nothing is required for it to parse.