Michel Lavaud Orleans (France) wrote:
> opinion?). So, instead of giving an opinion, rather provide the test
> file. Or,  if he is enthusiast about it, maybe a demo file that
> illustrates some useful aspects of the package?

I think the latter is a rather useful idea, though it is not an
alternative for the classification scheme under discussion here.

I suggest that authors for future submission to CTAN should be
encouraged to include a small (!) example with their contribution
in .dvi format (because it's small), and in .ps or .pdf only if

a) it is essential to have nonstandard fonts or included graphics
   in the example

b) The documentation is of general interest for people who have not
   yet installed TeX and a .dvi previewer.

This way one can get a more detailed impression of the capabilities
of a package without the usual download-unzip-install-run-view cyle.
(I think .ps and .pdf are sufficiently similar for this purpose to
not get into a war between the two.)

Anyway, this is orthogonal to a consistent classification, and in
my opinion of lesser importance.