[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":183},["ShallowReactive",2],{"blog-scorm-1-2-vs-2004-for-powerpoint":3},{"id":4,"title":5,"author":6,"body":7,"description":162,"draft":163,"extension":164,"meta":165,"navigation":172,"path":173,"publishedAt":174,"seo":175,"stem":176,"tags":177,"updatedAt":181,"__hash__":182},"blog\u002Fblog\u002Fscorm-1-2-vs-2004-for-powerpoint.md","SCORM 1.2 vs 2004 for PowerPoint — which to pick and why most LMSs still want 1.2","Larry \u002F LOST END FOUND LTD",{"type":8,"value":9,"toc":153},"minimark",[10,14,17,22,30,33,49,52,56,59,80,83,87,90,102,111,118,122,125,128,132],[11,12,13],"p",{},"There are four versions of SCORM you might care about: 1.1 (extinct), 1.2 (2001, still the default), 2004 2nd edition (don't use), and 2004 3rd\u002F4th edition (the \"modern\" choice). Every time a client asks us \"which one should I pick for my PowerPoint conversion?\", they've usually already read a 3,000-word comparison post that doesn't help them decide.",[11,15,16],{},"Here's the short version.",[18,19,21],"h2",{"id":20},"pick-scorm-12-unless-you-have-a-specific-reason-not-to","Pick SCORM 1.2 unless you have a specific reason not to",[11,23,24,25,29],{},"Most enterprise LMSs still standardise on SCORM 1.2 internally. Even ones that ",[26,27,28],"em",{},"advertise"," SCORM 2004 support often implement it partially, with quirks that break completion tracking or suspend data in ways you don't find until a learner calls you. Moodle, TalentLMS, Cornerstone, Totara and SAP SuccessFactors all handle 1.2 reliably. About a third of them handle 2004 reliably.",[11,31,32],{},"If your course is a converted PowerPoint deck — linear, with maybe a quiz at the end — 1.2 does everything you need:",[34,35,36,40,43,46],"ul",{},[37,38,39],"li",{},"Slide-by-slide navigation",[37,41,42],{},"Completion tracking",[37,44,45],{},"A single score, if you need one",[37,47,48],{},"Resume on reload",[11,50,51],{},"That's 95% of PowerPoint conversions. SCORM 1.2 is fine.",[18,53,55],{"id":54},"when-2004-actually-matters","When 2004 actually matters",[11,57,58],{},"Pick SCORM 2004 if you genuinely need one of these:",[34,60,61,68,74],{},[37,62,63,67],{},[64,65,66],"strong",{},"Sequencing and navigation rules."," If the course locks later modules until earlier ones are complete, passed, or bookmarked in a specific way — that's 2004 territory. PowerPoint conversions rarely need this.",[37,69,70,73],{},[64,71,72],{},"Multiple learner attempts, scored independently."," 1.2 stores one score per attempt; 2004 handles multiple attempts cleanly.",[37,75,76,79],{},[64,77,78],{},"Rich assessment data."," Per-question reporting, objectives beyond a single pass\u002Ffail, xAPI-ish richness without going all the way to xAPI.",[11,81,82],{},"None of that is usually a PowerPoint conversion. If you're converting a deck, pick 1.2.",[18,84,86],{"id":85},"the-suspend_data-trap","The suspend_data trap",[11,88,89],{},"This is the one that catches people out.",[11,91,92,93,97,98,101],{},"SCORM 1.2 stores \"where the learner is up to\" in a field called ",[94,95,96],"code",{},"cmi.suspend_data",". ",[64,99,100],{},"The spec caps it at 4,096 characters",", and most LMSs honour the cap. Cornerstone sometimes allows more; Moodle sometimes doesn't. Treat 4KB as the real limit and stay well under.",[11,103,104,105,110],{},"A 200-slide PowerPoint deck with branching, per-slide quiz state, and bookmarking can blow past 4KB without much effort if the conversion tool serialises lazily. We've seen ",[106,107,109],"a",{"href":108},"\u002Fblog\u002Fwhy-free-ppt-to-scorm-tools-fail-on-mobile","free converters"," JSON-stringify every slide's metadata into suspend_data; one client came to us after their 180-slide compliance deck lost learner progress every time someone resumed.",[11,112,113,114,117],{},"SCORM 2004 raised the limit to 64KB, which buys you headroom but doesn't fix the underlying problem: ",[64,115,116],{},"you shouldn't be storing 64KB of state per learner session anyway",". If a conversion pushes you that close, the course needs to be split into multiple SCOs (modules), each with its own independent state.",[18,119,121],{"id":120},"what-we-actually-do","What we actually do",[11,123,124],{},"When we take on a PowerPoint conversion, the question isn't \"1.2 or 2004?\" — it's \"does this course fit the budget that 1.2 gives us?\". Usually yes. When it doesn't, we split, we don't upgrade.",[11,126,127],{},"If you need 2004 because your LMS admin has ruled out 1.2 (rare, but happens), we ship 2004 3rd or 4th edition. Never 2nd.",[18,129,131],{"id":130},"tldr","TL;DR",[34,133,134,137,144,147],{},[37,135,136],{},"Default to SCORM 1.2 for PowerPoint conversions.",[37,138,139,140,143],{},"Watch the 4KB ",[94,141,142],{},"suspend_data"," ceiling — split long courses into multiple SCOs before you hit it.",[37,145,146],{},"Only go to SCORM 2004 if you have a specific sequencing, multi-attempt, or rich-reporting need — not \"because it's newer\".",[37,148,149,150,152],{},"If someone promises to give you a 200-slide deck in a single SCORM 1.2 package, ask them what's in ",[94,151,142],{},".",{"title":154,"searchDepth":155,"depth":155,"links":156},"",2,[157,158,159,160,161],{"id":20,"depth":155,"text":21},{"id":54,"depth":155,"text":55},{"id":85,"depth":155,"text":86},{"id":120,"depth":155,"text":121},{"id":130,"depth":155,"text":131},"The short, practical answer to a question every L&D team asks when commissioning a SCORM conversion. Plus the suspend_data trap that bites you if you pick 1.2 without reading the small print.",false,"md",{"relatedPages":166},[167,170],{"path":168,"title":169},"\u002Fblog\u002F5-scorm-errors-that-break-powerpoint-conversions","5 SCORM errors that break PowerPoint conversions",{"path":108,"title":171},"Why free PPT-to-SCORM tools fail on mobile",true,"\u002Fblog\u002Fscorm-1-2-vs-2004-for-powerpoint","2026-04-23",{"title":5,"description":162},"blog\u002Fscorm-1-2-vs-2004-for-powerpoint",[178,179,180],"scorm","powerpoint","lms","2026-04-25","sr3PVEeYKkkvWmJY72DmG5o73Eg3ds7OClCrm4p96Lo",1777204340751]