>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Dalke <dalke at acm.org> writes:
>> what I'd really like to see is some sort of certification by a
>> trusted third party.
>>>> Since that's likely to be unworkable for a number of reasons,
>> source code access is a workable intermediate step.
Andrew> Ohh, that's an interesting thought. Problems I see are who
Andrew> will pay for it, how to you come up with a uniform rating
Andrew> system, how do users of the review balance usefulness
Andrew> vs. errors.
Well, clearly the software publisher should pay for the certification
process. Or maybe the cert. should cost for payware publishers, but be
gratis for non-profit products.
The metric(s) would be tricky -- some sort of test suite would
probably need to be developed. Standard sets of data for each type of
application.
I think the appropriate analogue would be Underwriter Labs, the U/L
people who do testing of consumer products in the US (and elsewhere?).
I do think there's a business model in there somewhere; if anybody
runs with it, please feel free to cut me in on the IPO. 8^)=
john.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[ John S Jacobs Anderson ]------><URL:mailto:jacobs at genehack.org>
[ Genehack: Not your daddy's weblog ]------><URL:http://genehack.org>
