28:43 “These three aspects of representation were presented in the context, first of all, of using models and simulations in learning, and then secondly, in the design of adaptive learning. So, what was I up to with that, and I did go into a minimum dispersion on, well, types of models, types of connectivism, how we represent things, the critical literacies course and how the critical literacies course is intended to adress these sort of questions, and really what I was after: […] trying to get people to think more widely about typical ways of representing and describing.”
30:35 “Typically in adaptive learning, the method to describe a domain is to use a representational system which consists first of all of statements, or propopsitions, or as the RDF people like to call them, triples. And then, secondly, rules or principles, for manipulating this. And, well I’ve just finished reading Jaron Lanier’s book “You are not a gadget”, and it seems to me that this approach to describing a domain is very limited. To take — [? sound problems] in the current context of syntax — to take rules or principles for example. […] If our rules and principles are only what can be represented linguistically (that is to say, only what can be equivalent to manipulations of statements or triples) then it seems to me, our rules and principles are going to be very limited.”
Fortunately I knew what RDF triples are, and I was also a bit familiar with the limitations of this sort of representations that only work for “snap in” knowledge of jig-saw puzzle pieces that snap into place.
And John, I meant just this jump, nothing more special.