On 12/1/07, Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > Diego Escalante Urrelo wrote: > > I still don't think Foundation should get involved into saying place X > > is an approbed training center, I fear that would go beyond its scope. > > But the foundation could publish a syllabus and some sample exams, and > then licence training institutes and companies to offer the training > (with quality control of the training course) - in the way LPI does. >
Doing that quality control could eat some (human) resources. Also as John says this could easily lead to an unintentioned favouritism. I totally agree with him about being against partnering with an entity over another. The cons would outweight the benefits, I think we would get a lot of free problems from stuff like this. I imagine fountains of FUD on every corner. I really don't like the idea. > In fact, this would be a decent follow-on from the idea that Andy Oram > proposed (don't have the link right now) about having quizzes at the > bottom of documentation pages to ensure that the material is > understandable and that the lessons to be learned are absorbed by the > reader - both to help the reader validate their learning, and to get > live feedback on documentation quality to identify areas in need of > improvement. > This sounds like a nice idea, like a GNOMEpardy :). I think it could take a good ammount of work to ellaborate those questions however. Consider that we would also have to create and maintain some infrastructure for this. _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
