G. Matthew Rice said the following on 04.02.2008 18:06:
Ian Shields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:topic numbers (say topic 115). For the current exercise, which involves a substantial reswizzle of objectives, maybe just use topic 121, 122, 123, etc. instead of reusing any existing topic numbers.I still think the exam version needs to be exposed in the description, but I htink adding it explicitly into the topic numbering might be going too far.I like the idea of just bumping up the objective numbers. The 214 duplication predates my participation with LPI exam development but my guess is that this happened due to an objective shuffle/split in the early years (just like the weird progression of LPIC-1 objectives). Unless someone comes up with a better numbering mechanism, I'm going to: a) make the version of the objectives 2.0 (the point 0 meaning first revision of the new objectives). b) start the objective numbering at 120.1 for LPIC-1 and 220.1 for LPIC-2.
I like that idea, too. Couldn't we define that we change back and number from 100.1 / 200.1 the next JTA? If we keep adding 10 each time we renew the objectives we will run out of range ;-)
Regards, Taki -- Dimitrios Bogiatzoules Product Developer LPIC-2 Linux Professional Institute GnuPG Key ID A7E4D183 http://www.lpi.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lpi-german.de
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
