-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 92
CMI 5 Working Group Meeting Minutes – September 25th, 2015
cmi5 Working Group Meeting Minutes - September 25th, 2015
Attendees
- Bill McDonald - cmi5 Working Group Leader
- Andy Johnson – ADL
- Bernard Bouyt - Airbus
- Brandt Dargue – Boeing Research & Technology
- Ray Lowery – Pratt & Whitney
- Art Werkenthin - RISC
- Ben Clark – Rustici Software
- Henry Ryng – inXsol
- David Pesce – Exputo
- Andrew McGarrity – Thrivist
- Severin Neumann - eLearning AG
- Shai Deshai – Learning Plan
- Patrick Selby – LexisNexis
- Dennis Hall - Learning-Templates.com
Updated ReadMe.md file for GiHub Repo
Per issue #230 (Explain The Vision), the group agreed to update the README.MD on the GitHub repo to give an overview and background of the cmi5 project. This is very important to help explain what cmi5 is as there is no formal website prescense outside of the GitHub repo. This replaces the previous ReadMe content that only described how to use Github.
Weekly Experience API Specification and Conformance Testing Group Discussions
There is a related xAPI GotoMeeting to discuss xAPI specification and conformance testing issues. It meets Wednesdays 2:30pm (US Eastern Time) on the first 3 weeks of every month. Please note that the meeting reminders occur weekly – even on the 4th and 5th weeks – when there are no meetings.
Registration Link for this meeting is as follows:
Multiple Passed and Failed Statements (and multiple scores)
The group continued to make progress on this issue but could not draft explicit language due to technical difficulties with the GotoMeeting Audio.
In general the group agreed that in order to cover “remediation scenarios”, a relaunch of an new AU session would be the best approach. i.e. a learner trying for a "better score" on an AU would require relaunch. It was also discussed that “Informative Language” be added to specification to describe this behavior.
Requiring only one scored statement only one score per session on the following “cmi5 statements” would be allowed (with the last Statement being the final score):
- Completed
- Passed
- Failed
Note that the AU can still report score in other “non-cmi5” statements as much as it would like.
Given this new understanding, the “PassIsFinal” Setting may need to be removed as it would be no longer needed to cover this scenario.
More discussion will be required to fully understand the proposals discussed and draft spec language to address these issues.
Next Meeting
Next Meeting: October 2nd, 2015 – 10:30 am US Eastern Time