On 13 May 2016, at 17:05, Dave Cridland <[email protected]> wrote: > There's a problem inherent in this that we'd need to actually verify the > clients have actually implemented the features they claim, and that in turn > means some volunteer effort in testing them though. I believe that any effort > we put into this would be repaid hugely, though.
Or, instead of volunteers, projects pay to be certified. (Yes, I realise that’s not likely to be a popular suggestion). I’d be slightly concerned that if it’s volunteer based it needs to be unbiased - e.g. we couldn’t have some unpopular client sitting in a queue because the volunteers don’t want to do that one. /K _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
