Page Comparison

...

If content editor edits the same content we will hide the stage from the content editor and after saving we will add the stage again.

<stage w="100" x="0" h="100" y="0" id="3a52e8ee-349c-49de-b5da-a6a47b268218">
        <config>
            <![CDATA[{"opacity":100,"strokeWidth":1,"stroke":"rgba(255, 255, 255, 0)","autoplay":false,"visible":true,"color":"#FFFFFF","genieControls":false,"instructions":""}]]>
        </config>
        <param name="previous" value="59e8bd17-86ad-4043-b340-18c9d9862a5c"></param>
        <org.ekstep.summary rotate="0" z-index="0" w="77.45" x="4.61" h="125.53" y="-29.38" id="45ecdc54-ce1d-

48cd-a5a4-808c03ee12e2">
            <config>
                <![CDATA[{"opacity":100,"strokeWidth":1,"stroke":"rgba(255, 255, 255, 0)","autoplay":false,"visible":true}]]>
            </config>
        </org.ekstep.summary>
        <manifest>
            <media assetId="summaryImage"></media>
        </manifest>
  </stage>

Pros: This will take less development time and no other changes in the existing flow.

Cons: For new content types we are adding forcefully adding new stage programmatically, what if some other content types introduce in the future.

Solution 2:

we can club the summary and end page plugin which will behave as an assessment end page plugin. Based on the config received by the player we will switch the end page.

Conclusion: [ Solution 1 ]

By using “Solution 1” we can develop this within a short span and the right approach.

By using “Solution 2” it will be complex to generate end event and there will be more changes to develop this approach.
[DRAFTPros: We do not need to change content editor code for a new content type, just a plugin change will suffice this requirement.

Cons: We will be handling two endpage plugins based on the different type of content type [ not a cons though ]