No, I fully understand how to read it, you definitely don't need to mansplain it to me! Seems you're the one not getting it! Haha! I've been dealing with IP67, IP68 professionally for 25 years, never saw the silly and not well-thought-out IPX-8 format from any supplier, ever! It's just bad form, to say the least. If you want to needlessly expand the designations by using an X, it should certainly be positioned directly next to the 7, or 8 to label the dry parameter as X, because it has not been tested, for some ODD, short-sighted reason. Why not test the dry side, lazy! Aren't we trying to instill confidence in purchasing our product?! With the X improperly positioned next to "IP", it suggests that X represents another word, like "Ingress" and "Protection"... but it doesn't... unnecessarily stupid & confusing. Whoever came up with the "IPX-8" format should be fired!