I’ll bet there are a lot of other fellow forum members that would like to know this information now?
Count me as one. I’m getting questions about what we’re getting with Lectora that we can’t get elsewhere, possibly for cheaper. It’s also been asked more than once if we’ve picked the wrong tool for our content.
Darrel’s post in another thread hit the nail on the head for what’s needed:
Output should be web standard HTML5, CSS and JS. Responsive design should be handled using Grid.
Aside from saving myself the headache of creating SCORM packages manually and some accessibility-friendly automation, I feel like half the time I’m better off just writing content directly as HTML with CSS and JS in in Notepad++, rather than trying to get my custom stuff to play nice with Lectora’s generated content.
Right now, Lectora’s open ability to include custom HTML, CSS and JS is the sole selling point for me. Making that difficult because the overall implementation is outdated is killing that for me.
For others in my company with no experience with working with HTML/CSS and JS that are being called on to start working on e-learning content, they’ll look for a more comprehensive e-learning software creation suite that doesn’t require web-development knowledge to make good, interactive content.
I really hope the next version of Lectora can give it a jump start, I’m afraid we may also be on the path to going to other tools in the future like others already have if Lectora 18 is just another incremental update.
- This reply was modified 2 years, 4 months ago by Zachary Liquorman.