Storyline/Tin Can Experiences?

Jan 09, 2013

Just curious if any one has done some work with Storyline and Tin Can and what you learned.  Where you successful?  Have learners successfully accessing Tin Can courses?

Any implement it with their LMS successfully?  Did your LMS add native support or did you do something like integrate it with the SCORM Cloud?

53 Replies
Dan Strong

Gerry Wasiluk said:

Quick update on my experiences . . .

Loading Tin Can content into the SCORM Cloud as your LRS and then exporting out a dispatch package (as SCORM 1.2) for use with your LMS has one drawback currently.

While the course loads and plays with the LMS, and then is some communication, progress data is not yet sent, so you can't complete the course, as SCORM 1.2, with the LMS.

Confirmed this with Rustici and Associates with a ticket I filed with them on this.  Nice folks and great response.  They actually called me up to talk about our plans for Tin Can.

In regards to the LMS communication, this is what they sent to me:  "Thank you for your message. So, this one is a little tricky. While you can absolutely launch and view Tin Cans via dispatch, the progress information will not be sent back to the host LMS. The Tin Can is programed to have an end point of the Cloud LRS, so all of the statements will be sent there. Currently, Dispatch is not set up for Tin Can Statement --> SCORM runtime element conversion, but I am going to put this on our white board of things to look at in the future..."

In a later exchange, they thought looking at this in the spring or summer of this year might be possible.


Just tried it and getting the same thing. Not reporting back to my LMS. This is a year after your post. Hopefully we are now going to update to an LMS that supports native tincan LRS anyway. 

Ryan Tracey

Rebecca Adler said:

I had the same issue as mentioned in this thread, regarding the error "Error was: Activity ID '696lbcV1xNT_course_id' is not an absolute URI" from a Tin Can course tested on SCORM Cloud. SCORM Cloud upgraded from .9 to .95 of the Tin Can specification, and I believe that is why this error started showing up. I opened a ticket with them and here is the reply (which I've edited slightly for brevity):

"This is a new validation we're doing to make sure data coming in is valid according to 0.95 of the specification.

- Sometimes this message will occur when activity ID is OK, but other fields that also must be absolute URIs are not (such as activity type or verb).
- An absolute URI contains the protocol and full path. http://tincanapi.com/developers/tech-overview/ is an absolute URI, /developers/tech-overview is not.

Once the [Tin Can] spec hits 1.0 (sometime in April), this may become an issue. I would do a search for "Activity ID '6KdKFQInI5n_course_id'  [in your Tin Can XML file] and make sure it is an absolute path...in this case it shouldn't matter if it resolves or not. Something like activity id="http://tincanapi.com/test/6KdKFQInI5n_course_id"..."

So it seems that the error at this point should not prohibit content from running, but in the near future this will become an issue.

Thanks so much for this info, Rebecca. It helped me overcome those pesky errors.

However, now I have a follow-up question: Since it is highly unlikely a URI will be less than 15 characters, does that mean it will affect Saba / iPad users?

As per: http://www.articulate.com/support/storyline/aicc-content-wont-track-in-saba-lms-when-viewed-on-an-ipad

This discussion is closed. You can start a new discussion or contact Articulate Support.