CMI 5 Working Group Meeting Minutes – July 27th - AICC/CMI-5_Spec_Current GitHub Wiki
cmi5 Working Group Meeting Minutes – July 27th
Attendees
- Bill McDonald (Working Group Leader)
- Andy Johnson (ADL)
- Art Werkenthin (RISC, inc)
- Dennis Hall (Learning Templates)
- Mark Grant (independent)
- Clayton Miller (NextPort)
- Christopher Thompson (Medcom, Inc.)
- Ray Lowery (Pratt & Whitney)
- Jeremy Chapman (Pratt & Whitney)
Notes
The group continued its review of the cmi5 profile instance (see link below)
The group discussed the following topics:
-
A Category ID is assumed to identify a profile - The requirement for a context category ID is implied but not described in the xAPI profiles specification as it assumed that EVERY profile will have one. (and it is how profiles are currently identified). The group agreed that the xAPI profiles should be updated to add explicit language describing the requirement for category ID.
-
"cmi5 allowed" statements cannot currently be described in xAPI profiles - Cmi5 allowed are not covered because the cmi5 category ID is not specified in cmi5 allowed statements.
-
"cmi5 allowed" statements are very popular - Anecdotal evidence from early adopters show that "cmi5 allowed" statements are used very frequently. The group generally agreed that the next version of the cmi5 spec have a different Category ID added specifically for "cmi5 allowed" statements. This change would make it easier for cmi5 to be described using the xAPI profile specification but, even with this change, the xAPI profile would still require changes to allow Category ID to be specifically indicated in statement templates.
-
Multiple category ID's ? - category ID's are array so there will likely be multiple entries. Can a profile be identified as a collection of category ID's? What would this mean for conformance testing?
-
(Without changes) profile conformance testing will require more intervention - If the xAPI profile specification is not modified to address these issues, it will be difficult to scan LRS data to automatically determine profile compliance. Individual using testing tools would have to specify more parameters (such as which statements should be checked against a profile).
Discussion for next meeting
Review cmi5 profile to verify accuracy with cmi5 specification.
All Previous cmi5 Meeting Minutes
https://github.com/AICC/CMI-5_Spec_Current/wiki
cmi5 on GitHub: