Yes, the word count definition might vary depending on exactly how a "word" is defined. Done a little testing using the following 6 tools:
* Microsoft Word
* wordcounter.net
* wordcountertool.com
* wordcounttool.com
* wordcounttools.com
* Microsoft Excel
The count results from these tools on the examples are, respectively:
X X X X X X X => 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7 => (no variation)
-------------- => 1, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1 => (0 or 1)
fri3nd => 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1 => (1 or 2)
1.0 => 1, 2, 1, 0, 1, 1 => (0, 1 or 2)
100 => 1, 1, 1, 0, 1, 1 => (0 or 1)
5/5 => 1, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1 => (0, 1, or 2)
foo-bar => 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 => (no variation)
friend(name) => 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 1 => (1 or 2)
måste => 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1 => (1, 2)
Total counts for the 9 examples together => 15, 16, 15, 15, 16, 15 => (15 or 16)
Could you advise how Project-GC has counted the above using the previous algorithm and the new algorithm? It will be useful to understand the rules used.
At the end of the day, it probably doesn't matter a great deal as long as it is consistently applied. However, it is useful for the Project-GC algorithm to be compatible with that used for Kyle's BadgeGen. Do you know how the old and new algorithms compare with BadgeGen's?