CMI 5 Working Group Meeting Minutes – April 21st - AICC/CMI-5_Spec_Current GitHub Wiki
cmi5 Working Group Meeting Minutes – April 21st, 2017
Attendees
- Bill McDonald - cmi5 working group leader
- Bernard Bouyt - Airbus
- Andy Johnson - ADL
- Ben Clark - Rustici Software
- Art Werkenthin - RISC, Inc.
- Dennis Hall - Learning Templates
- Clayton Miller - NexPort Engineering
- Henry Ryng - InXSOL
- Ray Lowery - Pratt & Whitney
- Christopher Thompson – Medcom Inc.
- Steven Warwick - Health Decisions
- Giovanni Sorrentino – E-CO e-Learning Studio
Notes
Issue #542 - questions to fully understand cmi5 quartz spec
The group discussed this issue (See Issue #542 ) which asked how the AU could retrieve the Learners email address for the purposes of sending messages to the learner. The group determined that, while it is possible to do in cmi5 (using state or actor profiles), there is no standardized way to implement it.
SCORM vs. cmi5 Comparison Document
The group made the following changes to the SCORM vs cmi5 comparison details table.
Communication Interface Yes Yes SCORM uses a LMS-provided JavaScript runtime communication object/API that the content discovers and makes calls and receives responses. cmi5 uses a RESTful web service (xAPI) that the content uses to send requests/receive responses with JSON data structures.
Communication Interface
SCORM uses a LMS-provided JavaScript runtime communication object/API that the content discovers and makes calls and receives responses. cmi5 uses a RESTful web service (xAPI) that the content uses to send requests/receive responses with JSON data structures.
Since cmi5 does not rely on JavaScript, a web-browser is not required for content delivery. Because of this, content can be developed in any programming language that can support HTTP communication.
Course Metadata Yes Yes SCORM has a complex metadata structure, whereas cmi5 has a simpler, lightweight structure. SCORM has IMS manifest that uses the LOM metadata specification to describe content (SCO's). cmi5 has a course structure file with defined content (AU) metadata and is extensible for content vendor-specific metadata.
Course Metadata
SCORM has an IMS manifest that uses the LOM metadata specification to describe content (SCO's). cmi5 has a course structure file with defined content (AU) metadata and is extensible for content vendor-specific metadata. With cmi5, the course structure file can reference content from anywhere, it does not have be hosted on the same system. The cmi5 course structure is only references the URL for the content, it does not contain all assets as SCORM does. Like SCORM, cmi5 is also extensible.
Content Defined Data No Yes SCORM data collection is restricted to data elements defined in the SCORM Data Model. cmi5 contains a smaller set of defined data elements than SCORM and is highly extensible through the use of xAPI.
Content Defined Data
SCORM data collection is restricted to data elements defined in the SCORM Data Model. cmi5 contains a smaller set of defined data elements than SCORM and is highly extensible through the use of xAPI. This extensibility is interoperable for data collection and retrieval with xAPI. cmi5 further enhances interoperability in this area by providing session identifiers to group statements.
Discussion for next week
- Expanded Definitions of SCORM vs cmi5
All Previous cmi5 Meeting Minutes
https://github.com/AICC/CMI-5_Spec_Current/wiki
cmi5 on GitHub: