 Okay. All right. So the first thing I wanted to show is we have a new developer who's not, wasn't in this call, but his name is Ricardo Aragon. He's terrific. He's based in Buenos Aires right now, but I believe we'll be moving to Montreal with his family this summer to when that becomes possible again. And one of the things that he helped us work on in his first couple weeks here was improving some of the problems that people were having with footnotes and some of a couple of bugs that we had related to footnotes. So if you are an experienced PDF exporter in Pressbooks, you'll probably see when you go to your theme options, PDF options, you'll see two different ways of displaying footnotes. Either you can display them as regular footnotes, which would mean they'd be just footnotes at the bottom of each page they're printed on, or you can also display footnotes as chapter endnotes. Previously, if you selected the chapter endnote option and saved your changes and produced an export, all of the footnotes within chapters would work just fine. But if you were putting footnotes inside of a part, because a part can also have content, those would just vanish and disappear, and that clearly wasn't desired behavior. So now what I've done is I've got a little demo file here. I'm going to make a PDF export for this footnote testing, and you'll see that in the part itself those endnotes will appear and they'll be visible. I don't know how many of you have this affected, but a couple of people did notice it. So for example, here is a fake book, and in the introduction, here's my main body. So this is the body text rather than a chapter. So this is a part. Here's a footnote. Here's a footnote. Here's a footnote. They're going to be displayed as endnotes here at the end of the chapter, or at the end of the part. I made a very long alarm of some chapters. So excuse me, I want to scroll for like a day. Oh, it's way too long. Okay, so you'll see the notes are being displayed down here at the end of the part. That was always already happening for chapters, and now it happens for parts as well. Another couple of changes that we made here would be when you have an image at the end of a chapter that was floated left to right, the media attributions and the notes when they appeared were sometimes just wrapping around the element, and that probably wasn't desired behavior either. So we've introduced a clear element, which makes sure that they'll display on new lines beneath. So just a couple of nice features that we think have cleaned up and made this look and work a bit better for people that are working on their print exports. The other couple of things, we did a couple of small tweaks and changes to how we handle embeds. We've added a few sources to our OMBED white list. Mainly, we were looking at people who were cloning books that have been developed via with Lumen Learning. Lumen Learning uses press books as their core, and they had a couple of local plugins that were behaving a little bit different than our core press books. So we tried to improve and increase compatibility so that if someone was cloning from Lumen Learning, the book would work as expected in a different press books network. I'm not going to go into super great detail about that. Probably if you were trying to do that, you've noticed if you weren't, you haven't, but hopefully that works better for others. A couple of big projects that we've been working on that we want to show some progress on, one of them is a large directory of all public published press books that we're aware of. It has the very innovative name of Press Books Directory. Experimentally, we might come up with a different name, but that's the point. So what we've done is we're collecting via our API a bunch of metadata about all of the books that we know about. And so I'm showing you at the back end, we're using a tool called Algolia to store the database. And here in Algolia, you can see, for example, we have something like two and a half thousand records. And here's an example of what we're storing in our database here that will later be visualized. So this isn't the most sexy demo. It's a back-end demo, but those of you who are here last month saw something similar. This, for example, is a book published here on a press books network. Here's the name of it. Here's the language. Here's the author information, the ISBN, the description, the subject heading, the publisher's name, the date published, the license, and that it was cloned or based on another work. And then there's lots of other attributes that may or may not be present. So we have a bunch of metadata that we can visualize. And we also have ways that we can search and filter it. So for example, I could say, I want to see all of the books that have just this author and that have is based on. So clones, for example, that are CCBY licensed. And you can see very quickly, I've just filtered the list. And now there's two responses that match the list. This is clearly not the front end, but this will be the kind of functionality that you'll have coming out of this. As a very, very rough demo, we're just starting to work on the front end. Here's a super basic out of the box. We didn't edit or do anything to this, but the directory might actually look like this. It's told me it's been expired. So maybe it won't work since I loaded it too long ago. But you'd see, we'll have some faceted searching capabilities over on the left-hand side, and we're working on developing those now. You'll have a book card over on the right. Here's kind of what we're imagining the card for each book would look like. So this is the wireframe. You'll have a cover image if it's available. You'll have the title of the book, which also would be a direct link to find the book in the real world. It would show you the network that it's being hosted on because we expect there'll be 100 or more different press books networks that we're aware of that have publishing open books. The authors, the editors, if they have them, the subjects, the publisher, a word count and a description. And then in the top right of each card, there'll be a series of visual indicators. This first one will be a two-letter code that indicates the language that the book was written in. So in this case, EN for English, but it might be German or it might be French or it might be Chinese or it might be any other language that our books are being authored in. The next visual indicator would be the license that a book was published with. It could be all rights reserved. It could be any of the flavors of Creative Commons licenses or it could be public domain. This next icon will indicate whether the book contains H5P interactive activities or not. So at a glance, you'll be able to see whether the book already has interactive activities and you may want to look for books that just have H5P or look for books that don't and clone them and add them or what have you. And then these indicators will show you whether a book is a parent and has child clones. If it does, it would show you this icon and this icon would be, this book is a clone of another book. And so it would help you visually distinguish where in the kind of cloning food chain this book exists. So that's a little bit about the press books directory and where we're at on that. We're just starting work on the front end this sprint and we think if by the end of next month we'll have something much more exciting to show you and maybe even a beta or demo feature for people to start looking at in the real world. I want to pause there and say, does anybody have questions about the directory? What are plans are for that or feedback you want to give initially? Just a question about where those are being pulled in from Steel. This is JR. Is it pulling all books set to public or do they have to be set to show in catalog in order to appear in this directory? Right now what we're doing, the API will grab anything that's any book that's set to public. So what we expect to do over the next month, this is a great question because as network managers at some point, you may want to improve the metadata for various books that are appearing in the directory or you may want some books to be included or excluded. We'd like to give you some tools to have some discretion over what shows up in that directory, but right now the default is all public books and the metadata will only be as good as the metadata entered at point of creation. So that's the answer to that question, JR. I'm going to look in the chat and see what I missed. Oh, Ed answered that question. Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Nita. We think that's good. Ed was saying, yes, sure. So we're not actually, so Ed, your question is we're not actually making a copy of any of these books. This is not a repository, it's a referratory. So it's just going to be a listing of published books and where you can find them. Obviously those that have Creative Commons licenses will permit people to clone them and they could use the existing cloning tools to make derivative works or to make remixes. But the problem that we're hoping to solve with this is the problem of discoverability. I think people really love being able to have their own press books networks and have a little miniature ecosystem of books, but suppose you're working at one institution, it's often opaque or difficult to know what's happening at other institutions. I know when I was at Wisconsin, I really admired what Ashley and Mike were doing at Ohio State, but I didn't always know what books they'd published. And so I'd go check their catalog and sometimes I'd find what I was looking for. Out of the times I wouldn't, Mike would tell me about something that they'd published and I'd, oh, I didn't even know that that was happening. And it was just because we were friends that I would hear about it. Having a directory would make that much easier. And then the people that I'm not friends with would still be able to see my books. Yeah, the only thing I was thinking about is kind of workflow. I have some stuff that will probably be under development for forever. Me too. Because I'm glad, in fact, remember that tells us they want to publish openly, try. And we have some stuff that's ready to go and ready to share. And I was trying to think through, like, how could I mark some things and say, yes, this, this we're proud to share this, Musuni. And, you know, this we're still working on. Yeah, that's a great question. I think probably the best way would be to indicate in some way in the books metadata, whether it's the title that says in progress, or whether it's in the description, you could just say work in progress or something like that. We'll be able to surface a lot of that meta those metadata values. In talent unless we produce like a clear addition tool or what I would envision doing down the road would be saying, at a certain point, you could declare a published edition of a work, whether it's edition one or version one. And so anything without an addition would have, you'd probably assume that it was an addition, or if it was a version 0.1 or you could use kind of semantic versioning there to indicate that's that's not something that exists in press books yet, but I would like it to. And maybe that would help down the road. Yeah, and I think that's, Ms. Jim here, putting off what JR said, I think the show and catalog, it can be leveraged. Well, that's how we leverage it, right? When something's being worked on, we have it in public because it's going to be an open resource, but it could be being worked on for a year or two years, three years. And we wouldn't necessarily want someone to see that. So it'd be really interesting to be able to use that show and catalog as a limiter in a sense to say, well, the show and catalog stuff I want, the other stuff I don't, as far as sharing, or it's ready, you know. Yeah, that's a great suggestion. We might look into making that a choice that network managers could choose, whether they include all their public books or just the ones in the catalog. That's an interesting idea. Thanks. Anybody else have questions or feedback about the directory plans and what's happening there? Okay. I think this is the part of the meeting that, oh, go ahead. Jonathan, were you about to say something? You know, I don't want to hold this position, but I could imagine people holding a rather, you know, like all the internet platforms that one is member of, and then, oh, my God, they're selling our data to other people, and you know, you give your data with an expectation of privacy. Now, we don't, that's all those different assumptions and different platforms and everything, but someone who's super aggressive with those kinds of opinions might say, you guys are using your position to take data, which we did not intend. We made a public for the reason of someone who just mentioned, you know, we wanted to be shared with our students or something, but we had no idea that this was going to be shared in this wide away. And you're kind of having a, you seem to be not having an opt in, you're having, or even a clear path to opt out of this. And you're saying that's things that may happen in the future. I'm not saying I hold this opinion, but you could, I could easily see people who I'm friendly with having opinions about internet services and saying, oh my God, you know, you've gone down to the dark side and you're posting things in a way that people did not expect that their things would be posted when they start building resources. And it seems like maybe an opt in or an easy path at least to opt out before this goes live would be something to protect against that potential negative feeling. We just said, I don't feel, but I could easily see people feeling that way. Yeah, I hear that. I want to be sensitive to that. I would want to understand it a bit better. I think our understanding was the opt in is if you publish a book, you're putting it on the public web. But you may not want people to know it's on the public web. Is that the idea like it would be hidden from search engines or something like that? Well, if you're writing it, if you're, I mean, I view public, is this incorrect that if I'm writing, if I'm building a resource and it's very much, you know, I'm building it a few days ahead of my students, it has to be public so the students can get to it. I see. I guess my understanding of this was that you would only be incorporating our network catalogs, things that have been, that there would still be an intermediary buffer. Is that not correct? No, I mean, I think our initial plan was to say anything that was indicated as public. So any book, because that's what we're scraping right now from the API. If a book is public, it would be listed in the directory. But I'm hearing that there's some concerns about that network managers and people would prefer to say, no, no, only those public books which we want to have listed should appear. That flag is called public, but it's actually that flag is the way to get your students to be able to access a resource. It's not, you know, it's not the other meanings in the OED of the word public do not in my mind associate with that flag. And you are now moving in using another meaning of the word public. Yeah, what we tell all our users here is particularly because we have a lot of people who do collaborative work. And if you have a say a copy editor who doesn't necessarily have an account through SU that those books are still public so that those folks can access the book as well. I think, I mean, I, you know, I think the solution I offered would be a good one where you only scrape what's on the network catalog, because that's what that's how we kind of differentiate between what's what's a complete work, you know, incomplete works were kind of brought up before. What's the complete work, because we have complete works that aren't in our catalog either, but are still public. Sure. But the things that are make it all the way to the network catalog are the ones that like the authors fully intended to be discoverable by the world. You know, they're the ones we broadcast, you know, and share to open text with network or, you know, et cetera, the library. Thank you. Yeah, that's really helpful to hear. I think that's that's feedback that I'll take under advisement. And we'll we'll I would like to have more positive news to report to you in our next kind of product update. I think it makes sense from what I'm hearing. There's enough consensus here that many of you would appreciate being able to premediate which of your public books would appear in a broader directory. So yeah, heard loud and clear. Great. I hear pretty much consensus on that. And that sounds good to us. I don't have any objections to seeing what we can do to make sure that happens. And nobody feels blindsided or unpleasantly surprised. Thank you. The next thing I think everybody's really excited to hear about is the LTI integration. So we've been working to upgrade. We currently have let me rewind. Okay. So right now in the press books universe, we have an LTI provider plugin that allows press books to act as an LTI provider using the 1.1 or 1.2 or 2.0 specifications. In the IMS global world, they make the standard. They have released a new specification that's LTI 1.3. And that's the recommended tool that tool providers and platforms should adopt. LTI 1.3 has a new security model. And it also includes a series of suite of services that do other things that are called LTI advantage. Some of those include like user management and class list syncing. Other more exciting ones are called assignment and grade services. And it allows third party tools to pass grade or assessment information back to the learning management system. And so many people are interested in using press books and H5P to build interactive courseware and to use it as a low or no cost replacement for much more expensive proprietary courseware. We're aware of that. I've been interested in this for a long time. And so we're working to develop an LTI 1.3 provider that includes support for grade pass back. And we're very close. And what I'm going to show is what the interface would look like in press books as you do that. And then I'll turn it over to Carlos at the end here. He has it set up and working in his local environment. And we'll show you what the actual grade update looks like in his local instance with the press books test plugin and a test version of Moodle that he has set up locally. So the first thing I want to show you here is this is the press books authoring interface. Many of you have seen. So here's an example of a poem that many of you have seen me demo before. I'm teaching this poem by Lorraine Nidecker. I've got a publication history. I've got the poem. And then after the poem I've inserted an H5P activity. It's an H5P quiz. So this is what the published book would look like. And you can see it's a multi-part H5P activity. Each of these is being assessed. I guess it's being assessed, sure. Yeah, it's being assessed. I can check my answer. I can get feedback. I can do whatever the assessment allows me to do. And then as I'm working through this, right now, what's happening is only the learner is getting feedback, right? And then I could do more learning and reading and watching your videos. What's going to happen in the near future if you're using the LTI provider plugin is at the bottom of this chapter, the author would see a little interface that allows them to add as many assessments to this chapter, which could be graded in aggregate. So for example, let's come and find out what was the idea of that. That was H5P activity number one. So I'm going to add that to a grade report. And you'll see now this H5P activity called Blackhawk Health. It's a question set with the maximum score of 10. That's now part of this chapter's assessment. I can also go up and say, you know, after the publication history before the poem, I want to put another H5P activity. So let's put it up here. And which one do I want? Let's pick a fill in the blanks activity. And it's H5P activity number eight. So I could come down and say, let's also add eight to this activity. Wait, I have to save the chapter first. Okay, so eight is in this chapter and so is 10. And now I could say, let's add H5P activity eight. And we'll say, okay, we successfully added this activity. It's not a scored activity, so it has no score. Let's remove it. Let's pick one that does have a score. And let's, I don't remember. I picked the wrong one for my demo. Sorry about that. Let's do, this flashcard one, I believe is a graded activity. So that's H5P activity number nine. If I come down to the bottom menu again, I'm going to add this activity. That one's not graded either. Just kidding. Pretend I had prepared for this better and I had two graded activities. What would happen would be you would see an aggregate possible score for this activity. And then as the instructor, you decide, okay, which time period do I want this chapter to be graded on when the students encounter in the LMS? So I could say anything, any attempts made between March 1st and June 2nd, those will be the start and end dates for which I will include the score report. And then I'll decide what kind of grade scheme do I want to pass to the learning management system? Do I want to say the first attempt that a learner makes, that's the attempt that goes to the grade book? Do I want to say the most recent attempt or the last attempt? Would I say this, give me the best score from all of their attempts? Or do I want the average of all attempts if they're able to do this multiple times? So you choose the method, the grading scheme, the beginning and date, and then you've configured this activity. Then at that point, once you bring the book or the chapters into the learning management system, the grade book will pass the student attempt information, or press books will pass the student attempt information back to the grade book according to the score. This is still under development, but at this point in the demo, I'll turn it over to Carlos who'll show you how it actually looks and works with a very simple demo using Moodle's LMS, which may not be the most attractive visually, but it's open source and it will get the job done. Carlos, are you ready to take over screen? Yes, sure. Okay. Can you please allow me to share the screen? Permission granted, thanks. Awesome, thanks. Okay, perfect. So this is an example of a chapter that has been embedded in Moodle. We have embedded this chapter that contains already a H5P activity. One is graded and the other one is not graded. And normally the basic configuration for this is we're going to use the same common cartridge that we were using for previous versions of LTI. We set it here. We can inherit some other configuration permissions that basically allow us to receive grades. We save and publish. And basically here is again the activity and this is a great book. Okay. Since I have set my chapter config to average attempt, now that I'm going to do a new test, I'm going to submit a new result. You can see that this is the average score, I mean, accumulating over many attempts. So I'm going to do a new attempt here. So just I'm going to get it wrong. So this average score is going to be affected and it's going to be also, it's going to be decreased. Okay. And so you are able to see it. So this is the new average score. However, I could do something else. So this is also the the configuration interface that just still shows. So instead, I'm going to get the latest attempt, right? So I'm going to save again my config. I'm going back to my activity. So I'm going to retry this activity. Okay. So I'm going to do finish. I just submit. Well, this is something I need to fix. I think probably because I have an issue with the other activity that interfered with the result, that one is not the score. Those are the tests that we're currently doing in passing and grades between tools. And this is also compatible. The grade passback basically is compatible with Moodle. That is the one we just saw. And this is Canvas. In Canvas, basically the process is very similar. So we are embedding activities here. We have a grading report. Also, I may see the same similar result here, sending an activity. And this is the reporting interface for Canvas. Okay. Just let me refresh and check my configs here. Basically, this is the latest attempt. Just refreshing again this activity. Submit. All the communication that is happening at this point is through the new LTI1.3, following the new 1.3 LTI specification. So in this case, I just change it to latest score being sent to the LMS. And all the data changed now is compatible with this new standard. Basically, the new standard for LTI allows to have, it is more granular with regards to the information that we can transfer back to a LMS from the activities. And also, let's say we have different activities that are scoreable here. The score is going to be an aggregation of all those activities and that's going to be reported back. So this is the little demo. This is a local environment and we are still at testing stage. Thanks, Tom Carlos. There was a bunch of questions that came in in the chat. I'm going to read them out loud and then we can talk about them in case you weren't following the chat or you want to hear it on the recording. So the first question was from Ed. Oh, sorry, first question actually was from Thomas. He said, are the beginning and ending date required parameters? You know, the answer is no, they're not required. If no beginning or end date is set, all attempts will be considered eligible. If only one is set, then that will be the bound, but the other bound stretches back to the beginning of or the end of time, or as far as our computers can count, I guess. Jonathan probably would have corrected me if I'd said that. The second question that we saw was from Ed. Ed said, can LTI 1.3 transfer the maximum score from press books to the LMS? Or does that have to be set from both sides? So this is a little bit tricky, but the answer is essentially the LTI specification will transfer a percentage value as calculated by the tool. The learning management system then takes that percentage value and turns it into a raw score based on the total point value set for the activity in the LMS. So for example, Carlos in this particular example that he's showing you in Moodle, he could set the press books LTI grade value. Right now it's set to be worth 100 points. He could change it to be worth 10 points or change it to be worth 50 points in the LMS. The score that will come from press books will always be a percentage value that the LMS says, okay, thanks, they scored 80%. Well, I will translate that to 80 out of 100 or eight out of 10 or 40 out of 50 as needed. So what's happening is we do the grade calculation on our end based on what the instructor has specified. And then we just hand back the LMS. Here's your expected value. You calculate and you weight it and you do whatever you want according to your grade book rules. Exactly. I just wanted to show also that basically in the previous example where we saw a grade that it was above 103, like 103 points, basically it's because I had also another test activity that was adding three points. But basically my latest attempt was passed correctly where I got 100% for the press book LTI test. But this is just a matter of configuration. So I just kept another activity that was adding extra points to that. And I didn't weight them correctly, basically, in this interface for the grading. Thank you, Carlos. I didn't notice in the canvas part if that was because we hook up via the LTI right now and it's a link. It's not really connected to an assignment per se. And I didn't notice, Carlos, on your canvas version if you then how did you get it to communicate with a grade book column per se? Was it an assignment that you set up that was somehow linked or in parallel to that LTI link that had been established via the common cartridge integration? Or is it a total different integration once you get the 1.3 setup? Yeah. Added through external tool now instead of. So Jim, there's a couple of different ways that this can happen. I'll try to slow this question down and unpack it for people who aren't currently using the LTI. But generally the way that you take a press book book and bring it into your learning management system now is inside of the press book's book, you'll produce what's called a thin common cartridge file. Carlos, do you mind if I take over screen share and just show that part real fast for people? Okay. So what would happen would be in press books, you'd come to your export menu and you'd say, I want to take this whole book and make a thin common cartridge with LTI links. And I'll produce this. And what this is, this file is basically a zip file that you can bring into your learning management system. And inside the zip file, it has a bunch of LTI links to individual chapters in your book. So with one one import, you have created in your course. Let me show this in canvas. I won't show the intermediate step, but I'll just show like the canvas demo course. Next month, we'll probably show you the whole chain because we'll have it working in actual live LMSs in the world. But for now, this is where we're at and I typed in my password wrong. Okay. Okay. So in this course, let's say where am I at? I'm in a course here where I've set up an LTI connection and I've imported one file and here is my press books book. So here is the front matter. Here are individual links to press books chapters. Here's another part in press books. So everything came in as links to the press books. So if I were to click this link, well, I did it wrong. Let me go to a course that I have it correct for. Is this the one that works? I hope so. Okay, great. So what would happen is I'm loading the live press books book inside the learning management system, launched via LTI link. Now what we can do is if a chapter is graded and has HIP activities, we can declare that in the thin common cartridge package when we export. So the canvas knows instead of bringing it in just as an external link, instead of bringing in as an external link, bring it in as an externally configured assignment. So it will show up in your assignments. It will have a grade book entry automatically configured. I think we give it a default value of 10 points, but it could be whatever default value you want probably, and then you go configure it and it'd be a grade book item automatically upon import. Perfect. Thanks. You don't need to go any deeper into that. Sorry. On my account, you can deal with it later when you do it. It was just a quick question, so thanks for clarifying. There was another question earlier that I answered in the chat, but I'll bring it up audibly. Jeremy asked, how does the test get tied to an individual student? When or how do they log into the LMS from the book? So it's actually the other way around, Jeremy. So what would happen would be if you're using the LTI connection, the student experiences the book through the learning management system. So the idea would be if you're taking it for credit in a course, you log into your course, you click a link and you're opening the book like I just, let me go back to showing you. So what would happen would be, I'm a student in the course. I click this link. I don't even need to know or I don't know necessarily that I'm viewing a open public press book. I think I'm taking just a regular chapter in my LMS and doing the activity, and that's where the grade will happen. So the only way we know who they are is because they've launched via the LMS. If you visit the open book on the open web, we don't track your information. We don't know who you are. We don't need to know who you are, but those of you who are taking for credit in a class, that's where the LTI integration comes into play and that's where the exchange of great information happens. And also the grading scheme and allowing grading great pass back is a feature that this can be turned on or off depending on the configuration of the LMS. Correct. The LMS also is able to choose either if we want to share the username and email of the user. Yeah, there was a great question also from JR that says, when we showed you a grade item, that was the Press Books LTI grade for what would be what we're seeing is right now the grade item for one chapter in a Press Books book. So if you had 50 chapters, you could have 50 different grade items. Each chapter can be composed of one or more H5P activities. In the future, the LTI specification also supports what they call line item grading. So right now, let's say you have a chapter that has five H5P activities and we're sending one grade for the aggregate. You could also, if you wanted to drill down a bit further, see individual scores for each of the five components as separate line items. That makes your grade book quite a bit more complicated, but it lets you kind of see, okay, the student scored 80% on this big aggregate activity, but they got 60% on the first one, 100% on the second. 20, you know, like you could see how that grade was composed in a bit more granular detail. Yeah, Jim, I agree. That's hard. So we're taking it slow, but yeah. One thing at a time, Jim, come on, don't rush us. Yes, and Thomas, you can set the test title that shows up in Moodle inside of Pressbooks. That's the basic idea. Whatever your chapter title is, that should generally be the title that displays for the Moodle external tool. If I'm not mistaken, Carlos, I think that's where you set it. It's the Pressbook chapter title. Yes. Yeah. Okay, Jonathan, I'm reading your question now. If the H5P and LTI pass book is on the chapter level, what will happen with H5P in parts? I don't want to lose them like the part footnotes. I would assume that we would build the same grading interface and box for a part that exists for chapter. I'm not sure if we've done that already, but let me take a quick look. Carlos, you could probably. For now it is restricted only for chapters. Okay. It's restricted only for chapters, Jonathan. You're saying you want it in parts too? Okay. Heard. Or maybe. Tell us what you want then. Bill? Yes, sir. Does the work that you've done focus on H5P leave any hope that this could be done with other services other than H5P in the future? Yes, certainly. I don't think there's any, I mean, right now the integration that we're building is with H5P. That was our preferred interactive content provider tool. But in theory, press books is a container, like it's a wrapper. Any, we could add support for any number of interactive assessment systems as long as they, as long as we could work with them within this LTI provider framework. I don't see why we couldn't. I think there's been interest, like in the last call Jeremy was talking about some of their interest in other adaptive homework platforms. And we know other other schools are using things besides H5P. In theory, it's possible. I think right now we're focused on one tool at a time and keeping it simple, but I completely understand why you're focusing on one full time and incremental. What we'd be most interested in from SUNY is something, any system that could understand QTI. Yeah, for sure. Okay, so what Ed's talking about here, I'm not sure if this is familiar to everybody, but QTI is another one of IMS Global's standards and it refers, is it question type interoperability Ed? Yeah. Okay. But it's essentially an interoperable format for quiz questions, so that if you built a QTI compatible quiz, you could move it between quizzing tools and between learning management systems. Back in the battle days, I used to support three LMSs and we built a quiz in one and we couldn't use it in another and that was sad. And now they have a standard that makes interoperability better. And if you're thinking about assessment and supporting QTI, it would be pretty nice. Those were darker times indeed, JR. I know we took a long time on that and we're a little bit over time. I understand that people have other things to be and places to go. Thanks for your time and attention. I'm going to pause the recording now and I'm happy to say we could take more questions, but I do also want to leave space for people who have product questions or things that they would like to share in the open roundtable.