I decided to post the revised Adobe Captivate publishing template to GitHub, where it can be easily copied, forked, and updated. I moved a few bits of markup/code around, added some configuration options (such as the ability to turn off centering, turn on logging, and require SCORM when loading), and added a ton of comments to explain some of the new options. Hopefully it’s all self-explanatory.
For this blog post, I was going to write a summary of the changes to the template and wrap up the series. Instead, I’m looking at ways to increase the template’s flexibility and hot-rod it for some cool other stuff.
In part one of this series, we published a simple Captivate course and examined its file structure. In part two, we cleaned up the HTML file and externalized all JavaScript. In part three, we cleaned up the JavaScript. In part four, we updated the SCORM code. In this installment, we will put the finishing touches on our code and move our files into Captivate’s publishing folder.
In part one of this series, we published a simple Captivate course and examined its file structure. In part two, we cleaned up the HTML file and externalized all JavaScript. In part three, we cleaned up the JavaScript. In this installment, we will examine and update the SCORM code.
In part one of this series, we published a simple Captivate course and examined its file structure. In part two, we cleaned up the HTML file and externalized all JavaScript. Today we will clean up the JavaScript.
In part one of this series, we published a simple Captivate course and examined its file structure. In this part, we’ll take an in-depth look at the HTML generated by Captivate (using the SCORM 2004 publishing template) and clean it up as much as we can.
In this multi-part series, I will walk through the files Captivate outputs when publishing to SCORM 2004, pointing out the bad parts and suggesting alternatives when needed. At the end of the series, I will provide a fully-functional SCORM 2004 publishing template you can use with Captivate 5.5.
Neither of you are choir boys, and I’m fed up with your bickering.
There’s a big difference between best practices in terms of learning theory — something that’s difficult to quantify and/or prove — and technology.
I’ve had a flurry of emails and messages regarding my SCORM cheat the past few days, and have received feedback from a number of well-regarded SCORM aficionados, some of whom contributed to the standard and helped make SCORM what it is today. This is wonderful, I’m very happy to hear from everyone, especially regarding such an engaging topic.
But as I hear more from these seasoned SCORM pros, I’ve made (what I believe to be) an interesting observation: there is a sharp division between die-hard SCORM developers and casual users. I suppose I’ve felt this way for a long time, but it’s really coming into focus this week. Let me try to define the camps.
