ietf-clear
[Top] [All Lists]

[ietf-clear] Re. CLEAR Charter

2004-10-02 12:22:49
 My concerns regarding a level rating system for a domain,
 like one would used to rate a movie with 3 out of 4 stars,
 implies comparison.  This is bad with respect to the
 information required to justify such a rating.

 Currently the DNA proposal offers:
 'A' for Strongly Recommended
 'B' for Recommended
 'C' for Unknown
 'D' for Not Recommended
 'E' for Strongly Not Recommended

 This should be changed to something more along the lines: 
' A' Good 
 'B' Good with pending complaints '
 C'  New (unknown) '
 D'  New with pending complaints 
 'E' Bad

boy oh boy, do i ever disagree!

"with pending complaints" gets into the details of internal 
rating computations.  that is very definitely NOT something that 
this particular mechanism should do.

this mechanism should be cast strictly in terms of recommended 
recipient action, rather than anything that requires deeper 
analysis by the recipient.

consumer transaction approval systems currently only have a 
yes/no choice.  by going to a 5-value range, rather than 2, we 
are already being adventuresome.  But let us at least keep the 
semantics of the 5-value range utterly straightforward and 
consistent.


 This avoids the very difficult task of justifying the rating.

saying that complaints are pending gets slips down the 
justification slope.



 There's no WG chair to invoke BCP 83: we can go ahead and
 talk about most anything -- until we're chartered...

For reference, I am hoping that we conduct the mailing list 
exactly as if it were a chartered activity.  First of all, that 
will train us all to have good habits and second of all it will 
be more productive.


 The term "basic accreditation rating" should read
 "basic accreditation information" as rating and
 accreditation seem at odds.


 I agree that "basic accreditation rating" seems a poor
 term.

I have been using 'rating' as a distinction from 'report' where 
the former makes a direct recommendation and the latter simply 
provides lots of source data.  There is no religion to the term 
'rating'.

How about 'basic accreditation recommendation'?



d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker(_at_)(_dot_)(_dot_)(_dot_)
brandenburg.com