 |
 |
 |
| Todays Vertical Channels for
e-Content |
 |
Components of Tomorrows Horizontal
Channels For e-Knowledge |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Traditional Publishers and Direct-to-Digital
Publisherstraditional publishers like Harcourt Brace,
Pearson, Thomson and new direct-to-digital publishing enterprises |
|
Content/Context Repositoriesdiscipline-
and institution-specific repositories, plus marketplaces that
aggregate content repositories into a meta-marketplace |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Course and Learning Management Systemscourse
materials held by WebCT, Blackboard, Click2learn, Outstart,
and other applications |
|
Content Creation Toolstools for creating
and managing content/context through Learning and Content Management
Systems (LACMS) |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Universities and Collegesuniversity
presses plus faculty course materials |
|
Value-Added Content Servicesadditional
services that enhance the value of content and codified context
in learning objects |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Professional Societies and Associationstrade
publications plus tradecraft-rich bodies of knowledge |
|
Exchange Infrastructurethe marketplace
exchange service that enables metering, repurposing, combining
of content by demand aggregators, and direct users |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| The major standards
efforts have involved participation by government, educational, and
commercial enterprises. Early focal points have included standards
for describing content and ensuring that it will work with other content
and with all delivery systems (interoperability standards).
Relevant groups include the IMS Global Learning Consortium, ADL, IEEE
LTSC, Dublin Core, and MPEG. More recently, process standards have
gained attention (WfMC and GKEC). In addition, the publishing, media,
and technology industries have focused on standards for digital asset
managementPRISM, XMCL, ebXML, XrML, ODRL. |
|
At the end of the day, the standards developed by
these groups, while important for implementers, may prove less significant
for organizations than the visibility they have given to the requirements
and potentials of the emerging e-Knowledge Industry. Moreover, they
have been a powerful force for the development of a truly global
perspective to the e-Knowledge Industry.
|
|
In addition, while working together to develop learning
object standards, professionals in these fields quickly discovered
the tactical importance of mobilizing and unifying
the energies of professionals in e-learning and knowledge management.
Partnering with one another, they have achieved greater visibility
than either e-learning or knowledge management would have achieved
acting alone. Over time, the strategic importance
of fusing e-learning and knowledge management will become abundantly
clear to policy makers and practitioners alike.
|