fugu13

Adding that outside of an extension would be incompatible with every existing LRS and would cause a need for a minor version change. Every other change we've been working on...

If you're bringing up CMSs, quite a few of them only allow authoring with a very tiny subset of HTML for low privilege general users, and for good reason; that's...

There's a bit of confusion here due to confusing wording in the spec. When the spec says > All xAPI requests issued MUST be POST. That doesn't mean a client...

Reporting is a lot trickier than it seems. Even something as simple as a count can be difficult as data scales (there's a reason that, for example, Google search results...

Hi Steven, We're already seeing single activities for some customers hitting hundreds of thousands to millions of statements -- data collection possible with the #xapi is very rich. What's more,...

I think new repository rather than just new file, keeps things nicely separated. I want complete compatibility with existing launch (at least, in its stated form; misimplementations can be shut...

We don't really need to say that an LRS can support additional resources, that's just part of the nature of the web, but if people want to put it in,...

I don't think they need to be exclusive; we could easily allow for both options, and this is an area it's reasonable to be expansive

No, this is not a violation of the expected behavior for RESTful APIs. From the horse's mouth: > But why shouldn’t you use POST to perform an update? http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2009/it-is-okay-to-use-post

Additionally, the 'partial document update' we are doing here is not suitable for PATCH, as described in the very RFC you linked and explicated at http://williamdurand.fr/2014/02/14/please-do-not-patch-like-an-idiot/ . PATCH is for...