rousskov at measurement-factory.com
Sun Apr 10 04:33:20 UTC 2005
On Fri, 2005/04/08 (MDT), <geek at devcompany.com> wrote:
>> On Friday 08 April 2005 5:19 am, Brian O'Byrne wrote:
>> It seems to me that creating a complete and closed tree of questions
>> is a horrendously complex task, and will be difficult to maintain as
>> new licenses come on stream.
> and does nothing to communicate the true "general concensus". It seems
> that putting a nice front end on a "wizard" that only returns a hard
> coded set of results is a bit un-democratic and can not really be
> trusted to help make a "decision" based on the widest cross section of
> available input.
> why not provide an interface where the "legal" folks can provide their
> input and assign their own "weight" to each license/question/attribute
> via a web form, still using your -100/100 scale, then open this up to
> the public.
I think this is pretty much what is being proposed and implemented. The
core of the wizard supports arbitrary number of configurations. No
licenses/questions/weights/etc. are hard-coded. If OSI decides to let user
select wizard configuration based on configuration author, they can!
Otherwise, non-OSI configurations can be hosted elsewhere (and possibly
linked from OSI site).
We are starting with a simple hand-edited config file, but it would be
easy to add an web interface to adjust weights and other configuration
Hope this clarifies. Please see the "wizard design" thread for more info
and examples. More will be posted soon. If you are interested in helping
with the effort, please contact me! I am trying to stay away from writing
code, but I think that Justin Clift, the person who is doing the coding is
using PHP (just like you wanted), and we can use more brains/hands :-).
More information about the License-discuss