So let's be clear: there's the one that was released initially at the CF Summit 2019, which Nolan wrote. That's the CF Specialist one, or as you say CFS. (
Nolan blogged about it at the time,
as did Adobe.)
Now you're saying that just a couple of months later (Feb 2020), you and others created yet another, now calling it ACP:CF? And it's a "substantial upgrade in difficulty" over the one Nolan offered? I will say that
the list of topics offered for this "new" one doesn't seem that different from the Adobe post above (that last link is what's offered from the "curriculum" tab of the
current Adobe CF cert page).
As for why I press this, besides wanting to be sure we're all on the same page, is that the reason David (
@David Belanger) asked about this is that, yes, there has been talk in the community (and I thought it was coming from Adobe) that what was coming really WAS a new one...not one offered since 2020, and not the same as the one from 2019.
It was indeed supposed to be "harder" even than that current one, and to have far more video (I heard like 50 hours, vs the 10-15 of the current one).
So I hear you trying to clarify things, saying there is "no new one" (but there may be an update for 2023), but can you please clarify for everyone exactly what is the difference between the content in the CFS one and the "new" ACP:CF one?
BTW, it's quite unfortunate to see the ACP acronym used again for certs. That acronym has long been used also for the Adobe Community Professional program, which is not a cert program. Indeed, this debate was raised and resolved years ago (even having nothing to do with CF), but I see that
in mid-2021 Adobe went back to referring to their cert programs as ACP. Oh well. Just fodder for confusion. Spilt milk/water under the bridge, at this point.
Again the more important point is how these two recent CF certs differ, if at all really. We'll need something firm to point folks to, as anyone with CFS will wonder about the new ACP. (And it seems the talk of a "new new, really harder" one is misinformation. At least that seems settled from what Mark has said.)