Re: PROPOSAL: Compliancy Level Standardization, Revision 1.

[Bowie Poag <bjp primenet com>]

> Unless we paint it up that Level 1 is crappy and Level 3 (or 5) is the greatest
> thing since Plug & Play (just kidding).  It's all in the presentation.  If we are
> clear in our presentation of the compliance levels, they will understand, no
> matter which way the scale goes.  Predisposition, in and of itself, is not a
> sufficient argument.
> 
> John

Youre still missing my point, here, John..

What happens when something new comes down the pipe, and GNOME users want
it on their desktops, and on their interfaces? What do you do? Make
another level? Level 6? And then say its better than Level 5? ..You
totally lose the whole point of using LEVELS when you do that.. Is Level 5
now less desirable. And the more that comes down the pipe, the less and
less desirable it will be to call your apps "Level 5 Compliant".

This wouldnt happen under our way, because we dont have a fixed ceiling.
We dont have to change numbers. #1, as it is with everything, is always
the best.. Not #5 one day, or #6 the next.

Bowie

(ps..pardon the bad typing today. Crappy winblows telnet client at work.)