You really want to make judging code a part of an innovation competition? I know some have gone that route. But personally, I can't think of a more subjective thing.
Most commercially viable web applications find their success through execution of their idea and connecting with an end user audience. So it seems, to me, like the best way to judge their likelihood of success in the "real world" is by reviewing the end product rather than the integrity of the code.
If they didn't write tests, if their authorization code is full of holes, if there are XSS vulnerabilities everywhere -- end users are going to find these. They're also going to comment on them, and these comments will affect other ratings and overall public opinion.
I'm a developer myself and of course I have my opinions about the 'right way' to write code. But judging from that perspective isn't part of the contest for a reason. Not that it's wrong, it's just not the perspective that we're approaching it from.
Most commercially viable web applications find their success through execution of their idea and connecting with an end user audience. So it seems, to me, like the best way to judge their likelihood of success in the "real world" is by reviewing the end product rather than the integrity of the code.
If they didn't write tests, if their authorization code is full of holes, if there are XSS vulnerabilities everywhere -- end users are going to find these. They're also going to comment on them, and these comments will affect other ratings and overall public opinion.
I'm a developer myself and of course I have my opinions about the 'right way' to write code. But judging from that perspective isn't part of the contest for a reason. Not that it's wrong, it's just not the perspective that we're approaching it from.