I like the idea of a “ranking” system. For context: I’ve always been in favor of a 2-tier system, where the “OSAID” brand is reserved to the your OSAID+ case, but that does not seem politically viable for OSI. If using a global brand (“OSAID”) with two sub-designations (D+, D-) is politically viable, than that would be better than the current situation with OSAID because, crucially, it would provide an incentive and an “improvement” path from D- to D+, which we currently lack in OSAID (0.9). People publishing D- systems can be called out for that by their respective stakeholders, can make efforts to go to D+ and, if they get there, take credit for becoming more open than before.
(Like others in this thrad I’m also skeptical of the “verifiability” angle, but honestly I don’t think it makes things any worse than other (non) verifiable aspects that, frankly, have always existed also with the OSD.) So, focusing on the branding aspect, I think that something like what you are proposing would be an improvement over the status quo. Thanks!