You could also give a certain aspect (like BOM, schematic etc) a certain number or value.
On the other hand, if people share their original files, you already have the BOM.
The whole idea with with percentage-based scoring here is rather pointless. It is a quantitative measure, but not a suitable measure of quality, as my example illustrated. Well, we can argue about my specific example all day long, but that does not change the fact of the matter.
However, the way you did it (as described in the forum post you linked) by using numbers as a category (not as a quantitative measure as suggested by gcardinal) makes more sense. (Although i personally very much prefer letter identifiers underneath or beside the logo, your suggestion certainly has merit.)
What is really important, is the fact that people see if the files are made in a free or open source software program
No, that's not really important with regard to OSHW logo. Low barrier to access is more important than pushing OSS (or any other particular software). Hence why it would make more sense to push for (open) standard file formats. It doesn't mean you either have to push OSS or open formats. One can do both, but the emphasis should be in establishing open standard formats -- similar to what PDF has become...
I still think it makes more sense to use some sort of percentage, for the simple reason that someone can see easily how 'open' a certain project is.
For that same reason I don't like the idea of letters (in general), because it means I have to look it up and have to figure out for myself how open a project is.
Which by than becomes a subjective measure and therefore leads to more discussion and confusion.
The main reason why I don't like Daves idea at all (besides the fact that it looks very ugly to my personal taste)
But I really do understand your point that it should be very clear what a certain number means.
Therefore I suggested my idea, which is nothing more than a rough start.
Hoping that people would pick it up and we ultimately come to some sort of compromise.
The reason why I was talking about why it's important for people if a certain project is fully open (means made in open source software), has more to do with practical reasons.
For example, people who can only use open source software, can easily search and see if they can use and update certain projects.
Also for the purists, it just gives them a little bit more to be proud of.
Therefore you don't need such a huge score. You're not gonna use 63 or 87 or 38 for example.
(seriously, how would you practically translate a score of 63 compared to 60?)
Full steps (or maybe half steps) are fine.
That's why I came up with the idea I posted before.
I couldn't think of anything more than what I said in the other post.
It also makes the whole logo much more clear.