{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497/events","html_url":"https://github.com/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497","id":43802026,"number":497,"title":"Compile Desirable Use Cases Not Covered in Current Spec","user":{"login":"fugu13","id":51579,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/51579?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13","html_url":"https://github.com/fugu13","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/fugu13/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/labels/major","name":"major","color":"eb6420"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":13,"created_at":"2014-09-24T19:01:15Z","updated_at":"2015-01-02T17:04:40Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Ideally we'd get, for each use case, a General Description, a Reason for Current Impedance that is as detailed as possible (at a technical level, as whether or not it is possible is ultimately about technical capabilities), and, optionally a Possible First Ideas Toward Solution.\r\n\r\nThis is one aspect of brainstorming toward a possible future partially breaking spec version, whatever that gets called.\r\n\r\nThen drop those into comments here, and as we triage and evolve we can turn those into standalone stories."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/comments/68542468","html_url":"https://github.com/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497#issuecomment-68542468","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/issues/497","id":68542468,"user":{"login":"bscSCORM","id":732452,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/732452?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM","html_url":"https://github.com/bscSCORM","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bscSCORM/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-01-02T17:04:40Z","updated_at":"2015-01-02T17:04:40Z","body":"It's a bit buried, but note the error code section: https://github.com/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/blob/master/xAPI.md#71-error-codes\r\n\r\n\"Unauthorized for the given credentials\" is deliberately not defined further, and combined with \"An LRS MUST return the error code most appropriate to the error condition from the list above.\", I read the spec as giving the LRS a lot of freedom to reject requests for security reasons (including \"we're not going to accept this particular statement based on these credentials\").\r\n\r\nKeep in mind the overall 'journaling' model of xApi -- note how statements are immutable but 'void' is included in the spec. Also note the authority on each statement. Even though I just mentioned it being possible, in general I think it's more flexible to note that statements are all _claims_ and treat them that way. So, there is nothing _wrong_ with the statement \"student claims that they passed the test\", but it should be taken with a grain of salt when reporting or otherwise trying to infer meaning from the statements. Of course this approach runs into trouble when folks try to use an LRS directly as a reporting system, but it's a much more flexible approach to wrap a better reporting system around an LRS than to try to make an LRS a good reporting system.\r\n\r\nAlso have a look at signatures: https://github.com/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/blob/master/xAPI.md#signature ."}}