CENISSS Workshop Learning Technologies July 7 8 Tessaloniki

CEN/ISSS Workshop Learning Technologies, July 7 -8. Tessaloniki Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems Luis Anido-Rifon – University of Vigo (ES) Niall Sclater – University of Strathclyde (Sco)

Agenda l Decisions from Paris l Current State – Draft CWA-1 – Draft CWA-2 l Next Steps Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Decisions from Paris (i) The main task of the PT should be to act as a gateway between OASIS and the WS. An overall objective should be to publish one or more CWAs containing results from OASIS. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Decisions from Paris (ii) l Focus on WP 2 as this is producing the OASIS data model and adaptation of the SIF architecture. OASIS WP 2 is interested in publishing its outcomes as CWAs. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Decisions from Paris (iii) l A joint document (eventually producing a CWA on “Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other standards/specs”) will be of interest for both OASIS and SIF. This document will focus on identifying issues rather than proposing solutions. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Decisions from Paris (iv) l The PT will assist with “Quality control” for the OASIS WP 2 intermediate deliverables. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Decisions from Paris (v) Proposed CWAs: 1. Review/Adaptation of SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer. (draft-Q 2 , final Q 3) 2. Internationalisation of SIF and Harmonisation with other standards/specs (draft Q 2, final Q 3) 3. Adaptation of SIF data model for a European context (draft Q 3, final Q 4) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Decisions from Paris (v) Proposed CWAs: 1. Review/Adaptation of SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer. (draft-Q 2 , final Q 3) 2. Internationalisation of SIF and Harmonisation with other standards/specs (draft Q 2, final Q 3) 3. Adaptation of SIF data model for a European context (draft Q 3, final Q 4) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Open Questions Should the “Review/Adaptation of SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer” eventually become a CEN Workshop Agreement”? The WS decided in Paris to wait till the PT produced a first draft Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Open Questions Should the “Review/Adaptation of SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer” eventually become a CEN Workshop Agreement? The PT now suggests to publish the final version of this document as a CWA since it provides valuable contributions to the SIF specification. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer Organization of the draft document: 1. - Introduction 2. - SIF Message Passing 3. - SIF Architecture 4. - SIF Infrastructure 5. - HTTPS and its use by the SIF Infrastructure Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations 7. - References Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 1. - Introduction Overall view of this report, which includes four deliverables of OASIS and the PT comments on them to: 1. - Provide an external review to improve the OASIS deliverables. 2. - Work out a set of recommendations (CWA) for the SIF and SIF-based specification developers. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing This section gives a general overview of Messaging and discusses the SIF message passing mechanism and the Java Messaging Service (JMS) The gist of this section is the recommendation made by OASIS to adopt JMS as its messaging service Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) The OASIS review on SIF Message Passing proposes the use of JMS at this level. The CEN/ISSS WS-LT Project Team has identified two main drawbacks insofar this recommendation is concerned: 1. - Although JMS is an open specification with a clearly defined procedure to specify interfaces for message passing, it is tied to a particular technology. Open specifications should try to keep them technology independent. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) The OASIS review on SIF Message Passing proposes the use of JMS at this level. The CEN/ISSS WS-LT Project Team has identified two main drawbacks insofar this recommendation is concerned: 2. - The business logic behind the message passing, including message processing cannot be directly specified using JMS. Therefore, the same SIF rules must be kept in the specification. JMS appears as a higher level interface to encapsulate the business logic for message interchange. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) Message Processing and Passing business logic is specified in SIF using the natural language. Textual descriptions with some graphics are used to describe how messages should be exchange and how they should be processed by the different parties involved. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) The CEN/ISSS WS-LT PT recommends at this level: Formalize the SIF specification insofar message passing and message processing is concerned, using a modelling mechanism as open and technology and platform independent as possible. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) The following two alternatives may be considered by SIF and OASIS and further studied: 1. The Unified Modelling Language (UML). 2. The Business Process Execution Language for Web Services, BPEL 4 WS, which is being developed by a group of enterprises and institutions grouped in a Consortium: "Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards". Or the W 3 C’s “Web Services Choreography” whose main target is to define an official recommendation of a business process definition language. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) Interoperability at the low level: Instead of the SIF-defined binding over HTTPS (section 3. 6 of SIF specification), the PT proposes the use of SOAP, a widely used XML-based protocol over HTTP. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) APIs for Message Processing and Message Passing: The business logic for SIF message processing and passing needs to be formally specified to guarantee interoperability. This must be included as a normative section in the SIF specification. There is no need to identify common APIs to encapsulate this logic, since the interoperability is guaranteed by the implementation of a common API, not by the API itself. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) APIs for Message Processing and Message Passing: Nevertheless, the specification of a common interface may be proposed as a way to promote the development of reusable components, which, in turn, could be used by those developing SIFcompliant software. This type of interface definition should be included in a “best practice”like document (no normative document). Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) APIs for Message Processing and Message Passing: Such a specification should be defined using a interface definition language as open and technology independent as possible. The OMG’s Interface Definition Language (IDL) is the IDL proposed by this PT to be analyzed. However, any other interface language should be appropriate enough provided it has no tie to any technology or implementation environment. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) APIs for Message Processing and Message Passing: Once the Application Programming Interface were specified at the conceptual level the next step should be to bind this conceptual interface to concrete interfaces for particular technologies and programming languages (e. g. Java, C++, etc. ). Such bindings may be included in additional documents or appendixes to the “SIF APIs best practice guidelines”. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 2. - SIF Message Passing (Comments by the PT) APIs for Message Processing and Message Passing: This is where a proposal for using a concrete Application Programming Interface for Message Passing, like JMS, makes more sense. A Javabased API should appear as a binding of the previously proposed conceptual API for Java. JMS may be included as the off-the-shelf procedure to encapsulate message passing. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture This section includes a review on the SIF Architecture made by the OASIS team. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) A deeper analysis of what is presented in section 3 of SIF specification [3] leads this CEN/ISSS WS -LT PT to recommend the re-organization of the SIF specification in order to keep “Architecture” and “Infrastructure” clearly separated in the specification. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) What is “Architecture” and what is “Infrastructure” is a complex issue that always implies a certain degree of subjectivity. Nevertheless, there are several cases where both concepts are clearly mixed in the original SIF specification. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) For example, section 3 is devoted to the SIF architecture, whereas some of its subsections clearly deals with infrastructure: l Section 3. 5 that deals with Message Processing. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) For example, section 3 is devoted to the SIF architecture, whereas some of its subsections clearly deals with infrastructure: l Section 3. 6 that corresponds with Infrastructure Transport Layer Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) For example, section 3 is devoted to the SIF architecture, whereas some of its subsections clearly deals with infrastructure: l Section 3. 4. 5. 6 that manages the Use of Selective Message Blocking (SMB) to Resolve Deadlocks Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) The SIF specification developers should consider a re-organization of their documents. The PT proposes (section 3. 8. 1 in this report) a possible re-organization. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) OASIS proposes three alternatives to deal with Multi-linguality at this level. This PT recommends to deal with multilinguality issues at the data model level, following the same approach like, for example, in the LOM specification. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) OASIS recommends to include Management operation. a “SET” Nevertheless, this would involve a deeper analysis of the asynchronous communication model to avoid data inconsistencies in this distributed asynchronous-based environment. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) OASIS recommends to include Management operation. a “SET” Currently, there is no need to include such operation in the SIF model. Therefore, this PT does not support this OASIS proposal. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 3. - SIF Architecture (Comments by PT) This OASIS review is based on SIF specification 1. 0 r 1. This version has been updated to 1. 1. Due to this, the OASIS report includes some inconsistencies with the latest SIF specification. Some of them were detected by the CEN/ISSS WS-LT PT and pointed out in our report. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 4. - SIF Infrastructure The purpose of this OASIS deliverable is to provide a report on the SIF infrastructure and its relevance to the OASIS project. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 4. - SIF Infrastructure (PT comments) Because these OASIS reports have been developed by different partners, some inconsistencies have been detected by this PT. One of them regarding multilinguality was detected in this section and reported to OASIS. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 5. - HTTPS and its use by the SIF Infrastructure Transport Layer This report describes the use of HTTPS by SIF, including its use to encapsulate and transfer data objects. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 5. - HTTPS and its use by the SIF Infrastructure Transport Layer (PT comments) As explained in the SIF specification document (section 3. 6) the Infrastructure messages are used by SIF to encapsulate and transfer the data objects. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 5. - HTTPS and its use by the SIF Infrastructure Transport Layer (PT comments) This PT recommends to use SOAP instead of the proprietary SIF mechanism to encapsulate and transfer XML data over HTTP. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 5. - HTTPS and its use by the SIF Infrastructure Transport Layer (PT comments) In fact, SIF references SOAP and proposed its study for further adoption. SOAP was not adopted by SIF to provide interoperability at this level simply because it was not available at the time SIF was defined. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations Update the OASIS report to the last available SIF specification (only minor changes) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations General overview on SIF infrastructure Interoperability layers Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations General overview on SIF infrastructure Interoperability layers Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations General overview on SIF infrastructure Interoperability layers Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations RECOMMENDATION 1 Re-organize the SIF specification, in particular the section dealing with Architecture, in order to clearly separate the specification on the SIF “Architecture” and the SIF “Infrastructure”. Section 3. 8. 1 presents an initial proposal that may be used as a starting point. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations RECOMMENDATION 2 To formally specify the SIF message model including message format and message processing rules. For this, the use of UML or BPEL 4 WS (see section 2. 10) may be considered. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations RECOMMENDATION 2. bis (not included in the report) To develop a non-normative best-practice guide including an API where the message processing is encapsulated. This will promote the development of SIF-compliant reusable components. IDL may be studied as an initial proposal to define the interface. Bindings to particular programming languages may also be developed (e. g. a JMS-based for Java). Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations RECOMMENDATION 3 To adopt the use of W 3 C’s SOAP as the mechanism to encapsulate and exchange messages over HTTPS in the SIF infrastructure model. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer 6. - CEN/ISSS WS-LT Recommendations RECOMMENDATION 4 To define logical operations apart from the equality and a more elaborated language for SIF objects queries. (oasis rec. ) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Open Question 1. - Should this report become a CWA? The PT’s answer is YES. A good set of recommendations (both from OASIS and the PT) may be included in a CWA on SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transport Layer. Any comment? Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards Organization of the draft document: 1. - Foreword 2. - Introduction to SIF 3. - Scope 4. - Abbreviations 5. - Stakeholders 6. - SIF Data Model Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards Organization of the draft document: 7. - Internationalisation of the SIF data model 8. - Harmonisation of SIF with other Standars and Specifications 9. - Detailed analysis of SIF Data Model 1 o. - Recommendations 11. - References Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 1 Objects that should be further studied. This section identifies two objects Student. Section. Enrollment and Term. Info that may not be applicable for non-US educational environments. This sub-section will be updated as a summary of the Detailed Analysis of the SIF data model (to be developed as section 9) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 2 Repertoires for data coding The SIF specification does not identify the character set repertoire that should be used to represent textual information. Nevertheless, this is an important issue when dealing with multi-lingual environments. There are several recommendations that could be done at this point. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 2 Repertoires for data coding 1. - The SIF specification may be updated to define a repertoire character set wide enough to cope with as many languages as possible, including Asian languages and those where the writing style (left to right or viceversa and top to botton or viceversa) is different from the western style. An interesting starting point would be to analyse the ISO/IEC 10646 and UNICODE. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 2 Repertoires for data coding 2. - Those SIF-based projects that adapt the American specification to their particular cultural and lingual environment should take into account what the appropriate repertoire character set is. In this case, special attention should be paid to those cases where it is possible to have SIF zones or federation of SIF zones that cover different cultural areas with different needs as far as character set repertoires is concerned. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 3 Actions on Language elements The value space for Language (Demographics object) and Language. Of. Instruction (Section. Info object) is the ANSI/ISO Z 39. 53 -2001: Codes for the Representation of Languages for Information Interchange. This standard defines a set of three-letter codes for language identification. However, this language representation has several disadvantages for its use in a European environment. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 3 Actions on Language elements This format does not allow the use of dialects or variations not included in Z 39. 53. For example, a variation/dialect of Spanish, Asturian, is not included in Z 39. 50. This is the reason to recommend the following actions: Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 3 Actions on Language elements 1. - Adopt a standard wider than Z 39. 50. For example ISO 639 -2: 1988, which is a three-letter code for the representation of languages. This standard covers, for example the above mentioned dialect of Spanish. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 3 Actions on Language elements 2. - Although ISO 639 -2: 1988 covers a wider set of languages than the currently used in SIF Z 39. 53, there are situations where this is not enough: 2. 1. - Variations of the same language depending on the country where it is spoken cannot be managed using only the ISO standard. For example, there should be a mechanism to distinguish between the Mexican Spanish or the Spaniard Spanish, or the US English and the British English. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 3 Actions on Language elements 2. 2. Variations of the same language depending on the region where it is spoken cannot be managed using only the ISO standard. For example, the following French variants: Norman, Picard, Wallon, Angevin, Berrichon, Bourbonnais, Bourguignon, Franc-Comtois, Gallo, Lorraine, Poitevin, Santogeais) do not have an ISO code. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 3 Actions on Language elements The following format is proposed as an initial starting point: Langcode(“-“Subcode(“-“Variant)) where Langcode: Three letter code according to the standard ISO 6392: 1988 Subcode: Two letter code for identification of countries ISO 3166 -1: 1997 Variant: Code for the variation of the language identified by the previous two codes. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements SIF Data Model does not specify how dates should be represented. The only reference in the specification to date format is in the section where encapsulation of SIF messages over HTTP is presented. In this case the format is, obviously, the format defined in the HTTP RFC (RFC 2616): CCYYMMDD. This format is followed by the SIF Data Model. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements Nevertheless, this CWA recommends to explicitly define the date format in the conceptual data model description section within the SIF specification. For this, an initial proposal may be a widely used standard like ISO 8601. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements In addition, if SIF is to be used in multi-cultural environments a more elaborated proposal should be taken. Specially, if a SIF zone may cover a multi-cultural geographical area or if SIF federation may lead to exchange of data among heterogeneous cultural regions. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements Although the format proposed above assures interoperability, other national formats for dates or Eras (reference points) are not taken into account. Provided there exists a unique format/era reference in each country, localization would be identified using the country code (using ISO 3166 -1: 1997). Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements In order to assure interoperability in a multicultural environment the ISO 8601: 2000 standard could be used as the canonical form to represent dates. The alternative representation proposed here should be used whenever providing a localized reference point in time is especially relevant (e. g. the first day of the Chinese year is not so clear pointed out in the Gregorian calendar). Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements Nr Name Explanation Value Space 1 Date. Time A point in time with accuracy at least as small as second ISO 8601 2 Description of the date Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements Nr Name Explanation Value Space 3 Date. Time. Locale 3. 1 Locale Identifier for the country where the Localized. Date. Time applies. Country code from the code set ISO 3166 3. 2 Source Identifier of the source (standard or recommendation) that defines the specific date format for the country Repertoire of the ISO/IEC 10646 3. 3 Localized. Date. Time The same point in time as in the Date. Time element but formatted according to the specific localization Repertoire of the ISO/IEC 10646 Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 4 Actions on Date elements <DATETIME>2003 -12 -25</DATETIME> <DATETIMELOCALE> <LOCALE>UK</LOCALE> <LOCALIZEDDATETIME>25/12/03</LOCALIZEDDATETIME> </DATETIMELOCALE> <LOCALE>AE</LOCALE> <SOURCE>http: //standards. org/ae/calendar. Text. Specs. pdf</SOURCE> <LOCALIZEDDATETIME>1 Dhu’l-Qa’dah 1424</LOCALIZEDDATETIME> </DATETIMELOCALE> Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 5 Actions on currency objects There are several elements in the SIF Data Model that are defined to encapsulate numbers representing money. In order to cope with multi-currency environments, the following recommendations are proposed: Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 5 Actions on currency objects 1. - The previously presented objects should be extended to allow the specification of the particular currency being used. A straightforward solution, which may be considered as an initial approach, is to create an aggregate data element (e. g. monetaryamount) with two sub-elements (e. g. amount, currency) being the latter the identifier of the currency used. Also, the different representations for amounts may have to be taken into account (e. g. for the amount one thousand fifty six cents the representation may be 1. 000, 56 or 1, 000. 56) Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 5 Actions on currency objects 2. - The identifier for the currency must follow a widely used standard. An initial approach may be to use ISO 4217: 2001. Codes for the representation of currencies and funds, which includes a three letter code for each currency. A further study is needed to check if this standard also supports different formats for the representation of amounts. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 5 Actions on currency objects Nr Name Explanation Value Space 1 Currency Identifier of the currency Unit ISO 4217: 2001 2 Amount Number indicating the amount of money Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 5 Actions on currency objects <!-- Example 1: Currency element with Euro currency type--> <Monetary. Amount> <Currency>EUR</Currency> <Amount>45. 96</Amount> </Monetary. Amount> Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 5 Actions on currency objects <!-- Example 1: Currency element with Euro currency type (attribute approach)--> <Monetary. Amount Type=”EUR”> 45. 96 </Monetary. Amount> Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 6 Actions on measurement objects There are several objects with elements whose value represent measurements (e. g. Route. Distance in object Bus. Route. Info). The SIF Data Model makes no reference to the possibility of using these objects in an environment where several measurement formats are used. Two recommendations are made: Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 6 Actions on measurement objects 1. - The previously presented object should be extended to allow the specification of the particular measurement type being used (e. g. miles, feet, pounds, kilometres, kilos). A straightforward solution, which may be considered as an initial approach, is to create an aggregate data element (e. g. measurement) with two sub-elements (e. g. amount, unit) being the latter the identifier of the measurement type being used. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 6 Actions on measurement objects 2. - The identifier for the measurement must follow a widely used standard. An initial approach may be to use ISO 31: 1992, Quantities and Units. Part 0: General Principles, Units and Symbols. Part 1: Space and time. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 6 Actions on measurement objects Nr Name Explanation Value Space 1 Unit Identifier of the measurement unit ISO 31: 1992 2 Amount Number indicating the measure Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 6 Actions on measurement objects <!-- Example 1: Longitude measurement using Kilometers as unit--> <Measurement> <Unit>KTM</Unit> <Amount>6. 7</Amount> </Measurement> Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 6 Actions on measurement objects <!-- Example 1: Longitude measurement element (attribute approach)--> <Measurement unit=”KTM”>6. 7</Measurement> Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 7 Actions on Vocabularies Many SIF data elements use vocabularies, defined by the SIF specification or externally defined in the set of codes SPEEDE (Standardization of Postsecondary Education Electronic Data Exchange) [7] and NCES’s STUDENTHB (Nacional Center for Education Statistics) [8]. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 7 Actions on Vocabularies These codes are composed of an abbreviation, which, in turn, may be a two-number code, one, two or three-letter code or a combination of numbers and letters. The code is accompanied by a textual description of its meaning in the English language. There are two actions that may be taken on SIF vocabularies as far as internationalisation is concerned: Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 7 Actions on Vocabularies 1. -Elements within each vocabulary are described using a textual description in the English language. These descriptions should be translated into other languages. This action may be taken by the own SIF community following a gradual translation process. 2. - An alternative to this option may be to put this responsibility on each SIF-based initiative, which will be responsible for translating SIF vocabularies into those languages relevant for its geographical context Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 7. - Internationalisation SIF 7. 7 Actions on Vocabularies 3. -Identify vocabularies where those proposed in SIF are not suitable for a given cultural/educational environment. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 8. -Harmonisation 8. 1 Introduction Due to the main aim of the SIF specification, information involved in message exchange is related to student management data and administration services. l IMS LIP l PAPI l v. Card Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 8. -Harmonisation 8. 2 Identified issues 1. -Specifications introduced above defines standardized descriptions for learner personal information. This is the main areas where SIF may be harmonized with external specifications/standards. This CWA recommends to harmonise personal data information included in SIF specification using any of the standards/specifications introduced above. The specific standard that should be used needs to be decided after a deeper analysis by the SIF and SIF-based inititiatives specification developers. Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 8. -Harmonisation 8. 2 Identified issues 2. -Many SIF data elements use vocabularies, defined by the SIF specification or externally defined in the set of codes SPEEDE and NCES’s STUDENTHB. Additional elements may be needed to cover the specific geographic and cultural needs of each SIF-based environment. For the latter, SIF and SIF-based specification developers must take into account existing initiatives to develop taxonomies and vocabularies for the educational domain within their context. (e. g. ETB (European Treasury Browser) [9] or CEDEFOP (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training) [10]).

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 8. -Harmonisation 8. 2 Identified issues 3. -The common data element Meeting. Time defines a time slot for a specific course. The use of the v. Calendar specification in this object should be further analysed.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 9. -Detailed analysis of the SIF data model To be developed

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 1 Recommendation 1. - Data coding The need: The SIF specification does not identify the character set repertoire that should be used to represent textual information and this is an important issue when dealing with multi-lingual environments. Besides there is no way to specify the writing styles (left to right/right to left or horizontal/vertical).

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 1 Recommendation 1. - Data coding Action Update the SIF specification to define a repertoire character set wide enough to cope with as many languages as possible. A possible starting point would be to analyse the ISO/IEC 10646 and UNICODE. An alternative would be to define, for each cultural environment where a SIF-based specification is to be used, which repertoire set is needed to properly represent the concrete language/s used in that context.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 2 Recommendation 2. - Language elements The need: The value space for Language (Demographics object) and Language. Of. Instruction (Section. Info object) is the ANSI/NISO Z 39. 53 -2001: Codes for the Representation of Languages for Information Interchange. This language representation has several disadvantages for its use in a European environment. This format does not allow the use of dialects or variations. For example, a variation/dialect of Spanish, Asturian, is not included in Z 39. 50.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 2 Recommendation 1. - Language elements Action To define the use of a standard wider than Z 39. 50. For example ISO 639 -2: 1988, which is a three-letter code for the representation of languages.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 3 Recommendation 3. - Variations of the language The need: Variations of the same language depending on the country where it is spoken cannot be managed using the current format to represent languages in SIF. Variations of the same language depending on the region where it is spoken cannot be managed using only the ISO standard either.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 3 Recommendation 3. - Variations of the language Action: To adopt the following format: Langcode(“-“Subcode(“-“Variant)) where l Langcode: Three letter code according to the standard ISO 639 -2: 1988 l Subcode: Two letter code for identification of countries ISO 3166 -1: 1997 l Variant: Code for the variation of the language identified by the previous two codes.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 4 Recommendation 4. - Data-value elements The need: SIF Data Model does not specify how dates should be represented. The only reference in the specification to date format is in the section where encapsulation of SIF messages over HTTP is presented. Specification of dates formats should be done at the conceptual data level.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 4 Recommendation 4. - Date-value elements Action To explicitly define the date format in the conceptual data model description section within the SIF specification. For this, an initial proposal may be a widely used standard like ISO 8601. The proposed format by this PT is in the form YYYY-MM-DD, as ISO 8601: 2000 recommends. To add an extension to the specification of the Date. Time item in order to give the possibility to use a Localized Date-Time when it can be relevant for a particular cultural context. The extension recommended by this CWA is reported at section 7. 4 of this document.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 5 Recommendation 5. - Currency-based values The need: There are several elements in the SIF Data Model that are defined to encapsulate numbers representing money (e. g. Billed. Amount in the object Billing. Object).

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 5 Recommendation 5. - Currency-based values Action The previously presented objects should be extended to allow the specification of the particular currency being used to indicate each amount. An initial solution could be to create an aggregate data element (e. g. monetaryamount) with two sub-elements (e. g. amount, currency) being the latter the identifier of the currency being used. The identifier for the currency must follow a widely used standard. An initial approach may be to use ISO 4217: 2001. Codes for the representation of currencies and funds.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 6 Recommendation 6. - Measurement-type values The need: The SIF Data Model makes no reference to the possibility of using objects whose value represents measurements in an environment where several measurement formats are used (e. g. kilometres and miles).

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 6 Recommendation 6. - Measurement-type values Action To extend those data objects to allow the specification of the particular measurement type being used (e. g. miles, feet, pounds, kilometres, kilos). An initial approach, is to create an aggregate data element (e. g. measurement) with two sub-elements (e. g. amount, unit). The identifier for the measurement must follow a widely used standard. An initial approach may be to use ISO 31: 1992, Quantities and Units. Part 0: General Principles, Units and Symbols. Part 1: Space and time.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 7 Recommendation 7. - Internationalisation of Vocabularies The need: Many SIF data elements use vocabularies defined by the SIF specification or externally defined in two sets of codes. These codes are composed of an abbreviation and a textual description of its meaning in the English language.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 7 Recommendation 7. - Internationalisation of Vocabularies Action To translate descriptions into other languages. This action may be taken by the own SIF community following a gradual translation process. Translations should be carried out in the short term for those languages more widely spoken worldwide. An alternative to this option may be to put this responsibility on each SIF-based initiative.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 8 Recommendation 8. - Proposals for Vocabularies The need: Many SIF vocabularies may provide a set of values that are not suitable or do not cover completely the specific scope out of a US school environment.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 8 Recommendation 8. - Proposals for Vocabularies Action To extend/modify vocabularies for each particular cultural/educational setting.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 9 Recommendation 9. - Harmonization of Personal Information The need: The main information involved in message exchange is related to student management data and administration services. Most SIF objects contains elements with personal data.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 9 Recommendation 9. - Harmonization of Personal Information Action To harmonise personal data information included in SIF specification using any of the following standards/specifications: IMS LIP (Learner Information Package), PAPI (Public And Private Information Learner) or v. Card.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 10 Recommendation 10. - Harmonization of Vocabularies The need: Many SIF data elements use vocabularies, defined by the SIF specification or externally defined in two sets of codes. The space value covered by this vocabularies may have been previously defined in other existing initiatives.

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards 10. -Recommendations 10. 10 Recommendation 10. - Harmonization of Vocabularies Action To take into account existing initiatives to develop taxonomies and vocabularies for the educational domain within their context. In Europe there exist several well-known providers of educational vocabularies in its wider sense (e. g. ETB (European Treasury Browser) [9] or CEDEFOP (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training)[10]).

Internationalization of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards Any comment on this CWA? May it become “final” after the review on the SIF data model, v. Calendar and an overall update by the PT?

Next Steps (i) 1. - Develop the final versions for 1. a. - Report/CWA on SIF Infrastructure, Architecture, Message Processing and Transpor Layer 1. b. - CWA on Internationalisation of SIF and harmonisation with other specs/standards Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Next Steps (ii) 2. - Develop the draft versions for the CWA “Adaptation of SIF Data Model for a European context” Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

Next Steps (iii) Integrate feedback from OASIS WP 2 into the final deliverables Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems

CEN/ISSS Workshop on Learning Technologies, 10 -11 December 2002, Copenhagen, Denmark Thanks http: //www. gist. uvigo. es/~lanido/interop/ Luis Anido-Rifon lanido@det. uvigo. es Niall Sclater n. sclater@strath. ac. uk www. sclater. com Interoperability frameworks for exchange of information between diverse management systems