Maybe an easy way for objectivity is for you to be a sponsor!
Anyway, it's an open model, any rating that is published must include the data. For open source projects, the data is also open.
You can see that open model is way more objective than a black box rating.
That's a wonderful idea. We want the model to be open, so open delivery system is certainly good.
Please submit great ideas like this in openbrr forum. That way, your ideas get the maximum worth, it will be heard by the committers.
Ehm, would you like to point out these weaknesess?
The model is open, that means it is open for changes. It is still in RFC state. We would love to hear experts like you to chip in.
Please posts your ideas in openbrr forum.
You've got a lot of great points here.
It would be great if you could post these in openbrr forum, it's more well directed there.
The model is open, the result is open, the data is open. Anyone can use the model to rate anything.
If anyone want's to publish a rating, (s)he/it must publish the data as well.
Quite easy, quite open and quite objective isn't it?
That's totally right.
That's why BRR incorporates the idea of Function Orientation. BRR doesn't rate a browser with measurements for web server.
You may want to read the whitepaper first.
Ask more questions at their forum.
The fact that the development is open means that you can evaluate it more closely.
With open source projects, bugs are usually open, code is certainly open, community is open.
These things you can now measure.
You can't measure these with proprietary software
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe an easy way for objectivity is for you to be a sponsor! Anyway, it's an open model, any rating that is published must include the data. For open source projects, the data is also open. You can see that open model is way more objective than a black box rating.
That's a wonderful idea. We want the model to be open, so open delivery system is certainly good. Please submit great ideas like this in openbrr forum. That way, your ideas get the maximum worth, it will be heard by the committers.
compatibility and interoperability is certainly a facet of "Usability." The model is prety good, I promisse!
sorry, joe is better.... :)
Ehm, would you like to point out these weaknesess? The model is open, that means it is open for changes. It is still in RFC state. We would love to hear experts like you to chip in. Please posts your ideas in openbrr forum.
You've got a lot of great points here. It would be great if you could post these in openbrr forum, it's more well directed there. The model is open, the result is open, the data is open. Anyone can use the model to rate anything. If anyone want's to publish a rating, (s)he/it must publish the data as well. Quite easy, quite open and quite objective isn't it?
That's totally right. That's why BRR incorporates the idea of Function Orientation. BRR doesn't rate a browser with measurements for web server. You may want to read the whitepaper first. Ask more questions at their forum.
The fact that the development is open means that you can evaluate it more closely. With open source projects, bugs are usually open, code is certainly open, community is open. These things you can now measure. You can't measure these with proprietary software