Currently the standard doesn’t mention the option to add a vocabulary attribute to the RESULT element.
The use of the Result element is relatively new and subject of collective learning. One of our leanings is that a publisher often administrates multiple result frameworks simultaneously. Each framework having different codes and structure.
Combining results and indicators without clarifying the respective vocabulary will create a an undesired degree of chaos.
so the proposal is to allow the attribute vocabulary in Result element
Hi Hayden
My proposal is not well understood i guess.
My proposal is not meant to facilitate to declare more ResultTypes other than the standard codelist.
The core of the proposal is to add vocabulary and vocabulary-uri attributes to the result element to allow result specification against different result frameworks.
So multiple declared vocabularies would each serve a different and specific logic framework accountability
Example of possible combination of result vocabularies for one activity :
Each of these frameworks contain their own logic, their own references, units etc. By specifying the vocabularies as attribute to Result element it would be clear to which framework the result relates.
Is this clearer now?