title: IMS vs SCORM: Advantages and Disadvantages
body: <p>I've read that use of SCORM is more preferable than IMS specifications. So I wanted to know what are main advantages SCORM has over IMS Content packaging? Does end user find differences between both the packages while using it in every case and if not, then is it advantageous to migrate from IMS to SCORM specification. This is what I have read somewhere:</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>"The key, mandatory difference between Scorm and IMS packaging is that
    in Scorm, each resource must be given an attribute of ScormType, to
    equal either "sco" or "asset". "sco" means that the resource supports
    the Scorm runtime protocol, allowing it to exchange data with the
    learning platform as it runs (marks, state, preference, communications
    etc.). So from the user's point of view, packaging brings no benefits,
    except that it makes the content transferrable to other systems. It is
    in supporting the runtime (and, if you like, sequencing -another
    add-on) that the user starts to see the benefit."</p>
  </blockquote>
  
  <p>So can anyone please explain that what does it mean by "transferable to the other systems" and are IMS contents not transferable and how user can start seeing the benefits?
  Thanking you!</p>