Some definitions:

From Stephen Brown: "A learning object approach implies reusability, a database and (probably) CMS, a metadata schema, vocabularies... It all seems rather complicated. It might be more reassuring (and manageable) if you were to adopt a simpler strategy of units of study addressing each of the topics in turn. Strictly speaking a photograph is not a learning object because on its own there is nothing educational about it. It becomes a learning object when associated with a learning activity (whatever the learners are supposed to do with it) and a learning outcome (what they should be able to do as a result of engaging with it. Without these aditional bits its just a fragment of resource."

From Rob: "whatever we can describe with our chosen LO metadata schema".

From Adrian: "A content item that is described, via metadata, sufficiently well enough to allow it to be used in a variety of different courses without modification".

From Laura: "A leaning object is supposed to fulfil a specified learning outcome. A content item, or whatever we can describe with metadata may not fulfil this criterion".

From Adrian: "In that case, would you define a learning design xml script as a learning object? Is there a term we can use to describe the actual portable components of that learning design, i.e. the content items? The concept of portability can be applied to the actual individual items of content also, without the necessity of a stated learning outcome at that level of granularity, surely?"