By popular demand, the SCORM API Wrapper for JavaScript has a new feature: the ability to specify what version of the SCORM API should be used.
Also, I converted the AS2 demonstration FLA to Flash 8 format and posted it as a separate ZIP file.
Blackboard‘s lawsuit against Desire2Learn just went to trial. This lawsuit has the potential to bring a lot of LMS vendors to their knees. Good luck, Desire2Learn. Hope you win!
The pipwerks SCORM wrapper examples have been successfully tested in SumTotal TotalLMS 7.6. FYI, the examples’ imsmanifest.xml files required some modifications (the old manifests worked fine in the ADL test suites, but coughed a little when used in SumTotal TotalLMS 7.6). The JavaScript, ActionScript and HTML in the examples remain unchanged. If you’ve previously downloaded the examples, I suggest you download the updated versions to get the newer manifests. Of course, if you’re a pro at manifests (Aaron?), you could always make better ones… making the imsmanifest is my least favorite part of working with SCORM. As always, if you test these in your LMS, please let me know — even if it doesn’t work! Thanks 🙂
Here’s a simple example of how the SCORM AS3 class can be utilized. (This example uses SCORM 2004 calls.)
Finally got around to making some Flash files that demonstrate the pipwerks SCORM ActionScript classes. I’ve created examples for both AS2 and AS3. You can get them here.
Both of these examples have been successfully tested using the latest ADL test suites for SCORM 1.2 and 2004.
JavaScript SCORM_API_Wrapper.js now at v1.1.3. Includes important typo correction.
SCORM.as classes (AS2 & AS3) now at v1.01. Includes check for ExternalInterface availability and presence of required pipwerks JavaScript wrapper.
My attempt at outlining standards and best practices throughout the e-learning development cycle.
Proposing a community-defined set of simplified e-learning development standards that can be viewed more as ‘rules of thumb’ than law.
Today Rapid Intake announced a new service named Unison. Out of curiosity, I perused the Rapid Intake site to read more about Unison. […] I certainly don’t mean to beat up on whoever designed their site, but as a company whose business is publishing web-based documents, this website gives me zero confidence in the quality of their product.
I looked up the QTI specs on the IMS site and couldn’t believe the boldfaced notice I saw on the page: “HTML documents may be viewed online, but may not be printed without permission” (emphasis added).
Can you believe that? IMS is in the business of creating standards they want the whole world to use. These standards should be open, easily accessible and free from licensing constraints. Why on earth do they want to put silly notices like this on their site?
