Hallöchen! Russell Edwards writes:
> On 2013-03-11 18:39, Torsten Bronger wrote: > > [...] > >> I can understand the desire for input in case something doesn't >> work out of the box with the Lens module. But what you suggest >> would be displaying debugging data in my opinion. > > Hmm, I don't know. Debugging data is about picking up potential > errors in the code. When you're talking about picking up quality > of error-prone search results, users are accustomed to viewing and > assessing the quality of results. For example, with google search > autocomplete, you get a list of options, not just its best guess - But Google has to deal with arbitrary Human input. LensFun, however, is supposed to analyse exact data generated by a machine. In this context, I consider everything non-working a bug. Besides, similar lens names may indeed denote different lens models with different lens errors. I believe that the fuzzy search would not be necessary if LensFun used exiv2 names. There may be fringe cases (e.g. the same lens on a different body, reporting a different lens name) but nothing to worry about. The problem is that the current LensFun database has been compiled without much quality management. This needs to be fixed as well as possible. Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger Jabber ID: [email protected] or http://bronger-jmp.appspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
