Closed Sangrene closed 4 years ago
Hi my friend! I think these changes fall outside the scope of this project.
re: fallback to localStorage - I think this is a task that should be left to the developer on a per-project basis. Obviously localStorage does not persist to the LMS and could lead to many issues. As an alternative to not making a connection to the SCORM API, it is certainly an option for local persistence, but outside the scope of this simple HOC.
re: typescript - I'm not opposed to Typescript in any way, but not familiar enough with it yet to want to include in this project. This is a result of my own limitations in not yet learning Typescript!
I also took a quick a look at your fork and I think there's lots of cool stuff you are implementing, but I don't currently have time to expand this project or review PRs. I'm certainly very open to collaboration, but again don't have time now to work with anyone on a roadmap. I don't want to implement more changes without working out some direction and goals.
I think it's AWESOME that you expanding this and maybe when we both have time to discuss in further detail we could collaborate?
Hi Jason,
Actually after playing with my fork for a bit, I ended up with the conclusion that I'm more comfortable decoupling the SCORM logic with React, placing it in a service and then using it in a clean architecture way.
Feel free to use any part of my fork though !
Hi,
I recently forked this repo to include Typescript typings and a fallback to localStorage if the module is not used in a LMS. Are these features in the scope of this library and if so, do you want me to open a PR ?