Talk:SCORM FAQ: Difference between revisions
Dan Marsden (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Why does this section of the article refer readers to an FAQ page on moodle.org's test site instead of the production version? [[User:Richard Enison|Richard Enison]] 11:02, 15 November 2008 (CST) | Why does this section of the article refer readers to an FAQ page on moodle.org's test site instead of the production version? [[User:Richard Enison|Richard Enison]] 11:02, 15 November 2008 (CST) | ||
Hi Richard - I have no idea how I ended up adding a link to the test site! - probably a mistake on my part, thanks for letting us know! - The SCORM docs could do with a bit of a tidy, feel free to just change it if you see something that looks weird like that! :-) --[[User:Dan Marsden|Dan Marsden]] 04:09, 16 November 2008 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 10:09, 16 November 2008
This page needs more information on SCORM conformance.
It should probably state something explicit like "Moodle achieves the conformace label 'LMS-RTE-3' as defined in the ADL SCORM® Version 1.2 Conformance Matrix". (Sure - a lot of the SCORM docs need improving! - are you volunteering to flesh it out? ;-) --Dan Marsden 21:15, 29 October 2008 (CDT) )
Is moodle applying for certification for 1.2? (Piers re-ran the Scorm 1.2 tests on Moodle 1.9.3 today and it passed all tests - keep an eye on the scorm forum for details about certification - It's coming soon! --Dan Marsden 21:15, 29 October 2008 (CDT))
What about SCORM 2004? this probably explains where this is at: http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=106299 --Dan Marsden 21:15, 29 October 2008 (CDT)
slash arguments warning when I add/update SCORM obects in my course
Why does this section of the article refer readers to an FAQ page on moodle.org's test site instead of the production version? Richard Enison 11:02, 15 November 2008 (CST) Hi Richard - I have no idea how I ended up adding a link to the test site! - probably a mistake on my part, thanks for letting us know! - The SCORM docs could do with a bit of a tidy, feel free to just change it if you see something that looks weird like that! :-) --Dan Marsden 04:09, 16 November 2008 (CST)
