CMI 5 Working Group Meeting Minutes – August 21st, 2015 - AICC/CMI-5_Spec_Current GitHub Wiki

cmi5 Working Group Meeting Minutes - August 21st, 2015

Attendees

  • Bill McDonald - cmi5 Working Group Leader
  • Andy Johnson – ADL
  • Craig Wiggins – ADL
  • Andrew McGarrity - Thrivist
  • Art Werkenthin - RISC
  • Ben Clark – Rustici Software
  • Henry Ryng – inXsol
  • Ray Lowery – Pratt & Whitney
  • Patrick Selby - LexisNexus
  • Brandt Dargue – Boeing Research & Technology
  • Charles Touron - ASTC

Notes

oAuth references

Per issue #235, references to oAuth have been removed from the cmi5 runtime.

Abandonded Verb Usage

The original scenario assumed for the use of the “Abandoned” verb was for abnormal termination by the AU (i.e. a program “crash”). Per issue #236, the group raised other possibilties for “Abandoned” such as a accidental “double-launch” or a “time-out” situation where the learner walks away for the AU for such a long period of time that the AU and/or the LMS authentication times out. In order to be more clear, consistent, and cover all these scenarions better, it was agreed that the “Abandoned” verb usage should be modified as follows:

9.3.6 Abandoned

The LMS MUST use the "Terminated" statement to determine that the AU session has ended. In the absence of an "Terminated" statement, the LMS will make the determination if an AU abnormally terminated a session by monitoring new statement or state API calls made for the same learner/course registration for a different session ID. The LMS MUST record an "Abandoned" statement on behalf of the AU indicating an abnormal session termination. After recording an "Abandoned" statement, the LMS MUST NOT allow any additional statements to be recorded for that session.

If a new session is opened for an AU that did not properly close the previous session, then the LMS must record an "Abandoned" statement for the previous session. The LMS must reject subsequent statements for sessions that were "Abandoned".

Optional Values in JSON

Another question arouse about the whether optional JSON properties should be discarded by the LMS if their value contained an “empty string”. The overall consensus was no. Instead optional JSON properties that are not being used should not be sent to the LMS/LRS at all. The following language was proposed to address this, but more discussion is needed for how to treat “null” values.

4.3 Optional JSON Values.

If JSON properties are indicated as "optional", you MAY leave property out of the JSON structure being described. JSON properties included with empty string are values that will be recorded. JSON properities included with a value of "null" will (language here for “undefined” vs “null value” need to be further defined)

Next Meeting:

Next Meeting: August 28th, 2015 – 10:30 am US Eastern Time

⚠️ **GitHub.com Fallback** ⚠️