'completed' and H5P

[Jonathan Kevan]

Hey all,

We had a chance to review the feedback from H5P and get a response. We are working on some of the changes they requested and waiting for some answers as well. A question came up on our side during the discussion though.

There is a feeling that H5P would prefer we strictly adhere to the xAPI video profile to the extent we are able to. This becomes a problem with the word 'completed' as we are intentionally breaking the profile to accommodate the pre-existing definition of this verb in H5P.

I know we have bounced this around a lot, but in this case the question comes down to are we willing to change 'completed' to a new unused verb? If so, to what? 

I propose we go with Jason's word 'concluded'. I think 'observed' implies too much. We leave everyone else's 'completed' alone and let them have that word.

In a future pull request we can take the issue raised by Pankaj about 100% and deal with it using Chris Kaplan's suggestion. For H5P, we expose an attribute that let's the user determine the appropriate % to submit 'concluded' on.

We are hoping to get an updated pull request sent out soon. Please give feedback at your earliest convenience.

- Jon

[Pankaj Agrawal]

Hi Jon,

Using new verb is the easiest work around to any conflicts, however, I have never been a fan of using new verbs as long as we can use existing verbs with same or similar meanings.  

We already have a progress result extension: https://w3id.org/xapi/video/extensions/progress

We already have a result extension that is used for % of media consumed. 

I have "another" idea that doesn't require modification to Video Profile: 

We can leverage the requirement that: A Video Profile statement MUST have an object.definition.type = https://w3id.org/xapi/video/activity-type/video

H5P can choose to use two completed statements sent to the LRS in two different ways:

a) A non-Video Profile Completed statement: 

This can be the "reached the end" completed statement, or X% completed statement. but without the Video Profile object definition type. 

It should be ignored by any strict Video Profile compliance tests or analysis tools. 

I would not mind any activity provider sending any extra statements, as long as it is not in the name of Video Profile, it cannot be called non-conformant.  

b) A Video Profile Completed statement: 

This can be the completed statement as per current agreed completion where all parts of the media is consumed. 

Regards,

Pankaj Agrawal

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "xAPI Video CoP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to xapi-video-cop+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to xapi-video-cop@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/xapi-video-cop/8c2310f6-d993-45b2-8228-a7580d3c4eb7%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jonathan Kevan]

Hey Pankaj,

I think the belief here is that 'reached end of video' and 'played all of the video content' are different enough that they justify different verbs. I believe that at least.

Yes, my suggestion with the % was just a user configurable way in H5P of determining when the 'played all of the video content' statement was sent, based on the value of the progress extension. If we did that.. we should record what that minimum percentage is in the statement in case multiple data sets are merged and analyzed. Otherwise, the group should define a value explicitly stated in the profile. I lean towards the former.

I am open to your other idea as long it's moving towards a situation where multiple video profiles can be supported. In this case, the client decides to use H5Ps 'default' video profile which defines completed in one way, or the CoP Profile which defines it another way. 

I think we should move away from a situation where more than one completed statement is sent and they have different meanings. I realize it can be filtered using the type, I just don't think that's a better alternative than changing the verb or supporting multiple profiles.

- Jon

Jonathan Kevan R&D Coordinator, Distance Course Design & Consulting (DCDC) College of Education, University of Hawai‘i at Manoa 1776 University Avenue, Wist 245, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822 Web: dcdc.coe.hawaii.edu

[Jonathan Kevan]

For some reason I am not seeing your latest response in this thread Pankaj!

I get what you are saying and I smell what you are cooking. What I need, if possible, is a final answer on what we are going to do because my development team needs to move on.  

First, let's simplify the discussion a bit. My understanding is that there are essentially three options:

1) Tools must align to the video profile - This means H5P changes their definition of completed to meet the video profile or change the verb to ended/paused (can be discussed).

2) Tools can append the video profile to their current practice - H5P continues sending its non-compliant statements, but can also send video profile statements. Appropriate statements would be identified as compliant in order to differentiate between the redundant use of any verbs. 

3) The video profile changes - In this case we would change 'completed' to another word.

Is that basically it? Sounds like the community roughly agreed on #2 in the meeting. 

Should we hold a vote on this to confirm?

- Jon

On Wednesday, February 7, 2018 at 9:17:29 AM UTC-10, Jonathan Kevan wrote:

Hey Pankaj,

I think the belief here is that 'reached end of video' and 'played all of the video content' are different enough that they justify different verbs. I believe that at least.

Yes, my suggestion with the % was just a user configurable way in H5P of determining when the 'played all of the video content' statement was sent, based on the value of the progress extension. If we did that.. we should record what that minimum percentage is in the statement in case multiple data sets are merged and analyzed. Otherwise, the group should define a value explicitly stated in the profile. I lean towards the former.

I am open to your other idea as long it's moving towards a situation where multiple video profiles can be supported. In this case, the client decides to use H5Ps 'default' video profile which defines completed in one way, or the CoP Profile which defines it another way. 

I think we should move away from a situation where more than one completed statement is sent and they have different meanings. I realize it can be filtered using the type, I just don't think that's a better alternative than changing the verb or supporting multiple profiles.

- Jon

Hi Jon,

Using new verb is the easiest work around to any conflicts, however, I have never been a fan of using new verbs as long as we can use existing verbs with same or similar meanings.  

We already have a progress result extension: https://w3id.org/xapi/video/extensions/progress

We already have a result extension that is used for % of media consumed. 

I have "another" idea that doesn't require modification to Video Profile: 

We can leverage the requirement that: A Video Profile statement MUST have an object.definition.type = https://w3id.org/xapi/video/activity-type/video

H5P can choose to use two completed statements sent to the LRS in two different ways:

a) A non-Video Profile Completed statement: 

This can be the "reached the end" completed statement, or X% completed statement. but without the Video Profile object definition type. 

It should be ignored by any strict Video Profile compliance tests or analysis tools. 

I would not mind any activity provider sending any extra statements, as long as it is not in the name of Video Profile, it cannot be called non-conformant.  

b) A Video Profile Completed statement: 

This can be the completed statement as per current agreed completion where all parts of the media is consumed. 

Regards,

Pankaj Agrawal