* alex ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> sorry, was unclear. robert proposed a meta-certification body which then
> gave the tests out to certifiers (netthink, iterative etc). this seems to
> me to be far too complicated and fragmented.

i think it was me that suggested this

> i think you need a single organisation which plays the difficult balancing
> act of:
>       * being respected and trusted by the Perl community (there's no
>           point if the Perl decision makers poo poo it)

hence the limitation to UK & ROI

>       * has enough autonomy from the Perl community or transparency to
>           not be perceived as a guild / closed shop (this accusation could
>           be levelled very easily if the exam were perceived to be designed so that
>           only an inner sanctum could possibly pass it)

it will be aimed at a base level, as i said earlier it at least initially
will not even consider skill levels, but just competency sections

>       * has rich enough grading so that mere mortals can achieve some

i dont think it will be graded

>         * being commercial - particularly focused on marketing the PCSE
>           logo to training companies, logos and IT directors. I don't
>           think a voluntary, well-meaning effort will achieve this. 

nope, i don't agree here - i don't think this is easy but their is
precedent, YAPC::*

anyway i'm posting a proposal in a few mins


Greg McCarroll                          http://www.mccarroll.uklinux.net

Reply via email to