When will there be a marketing campaign / official HAT logo etc. that can be used by those spending time etc. to adhere to the HAT spec?
I think the original idea was a good one but needed / needs a little more "branding" and enforcement with a benefit to those who adhere? All this needs effort however - (remember Sun's attempt to enforce Java VM certifications?)
Maybe the whole HAT thing is something which may be forgotten about - there are several variables (flat flexi cut outs etc.) and confusion which doesn't make it easier.
Hi. I'm one of the first to recover from the Christmas hangover(s).
The primary goal of the HAT specification is minimal user set-up and configuration. This is essential in an environment where users are learning about how computing hardware works, not how to set up computing hardware.
Videocore DT-blob parsing is now functional in BRANCH=next firmware - Phil Elwell has been working on this and is now in "public beta". This is the key piece of software that allows HAT overlays to be loaded on-boot with no user interaction.
In terms of specification enforcement - this is something currently undergoing internal discussions. We want boards confirming to the HAT spec to be self-contained to a certain degree - I specifically do not want an authoritative list of what is a HAT and what the Raspberry Pi foundation "supports" as doing this will increase our maintenance overhead for 3rd-party products. Having the hardware describe itself (through the EEPROM data) was the reason including the EEPROM was made mandatory.
Now that the HAT specification has been in the wild for a number of months and hardware manufacturers have come back with boards utilising this form factor, there will inevitably be omissions/ambiguities that need to be resolved and fed back into the HAT specification.
One avenue that may condense out of the specification review is provision of a suite of hardware/software checklists or QA steps that ultimately allow manufacturers to self-certify add-ons as HAT-compatible. By publishing this list of QA tests as a development package, interested parties can replicate results.
In terms of branding/logo - again something still under discussion. It is likely that the "official" name for a HAT and/or any logos used in promotional material or on product web pages will be trademarked in the same fashion as the Raspberry Pi name and logo is. How this acts in conjunction with self-certification is still something that needs to be decided.
Rockets are loud.