<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><br><br><div dir="ltr">sent from a phone</div><div dir="ltr"><br><blockquote type="cite">On 18 Jun 2022, at 09:26, Simon Poole <simon@poole.ch> wrote:<br><br></blockquote></div><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>IMHO the proposal suffers from trying to squeeze multiple
dimensions of a schools target attendees in to one tag. That you
have to add "normal_student" (whatever that is supposed to be) to
the values should be a red flag that something is wrong.<br>
</p>
<p>I would suggest splitting this in to at least <br>
</p>
<p>general social groups adult, child, ... so maybe school:for<br>
</p>
<p>special education, that is special education for issues that
transcend age groups and require changes in the curriculum</p>
<p>special infrastructure, that is support for attendees that are
disabled in one way or the other</p></div></blockquote><br><div>+1, age (adults vs. children) should not be conflated with special requirements </div><div><br></div><div>additionally: how would we tag a school that integrates pupils with disorders or impairments and those without apparent disorders or impairments (“normal”) in the same class?</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers Martin </div><div><br></div></body></html>