Gilles Detillieux wrote:
> According to Geoff Hutchison:
> > At 12:02 PM +0200 8/17/00, abel deuring wrote:
> > >A comment to my patch: I don't have very much experience with the
> > >"scoring system" of ht://dig (or ht://dig in general), but I don't
> > >think, that it is a good idea to give relative ranking information for a
> > >result set with minScore = 11000.090909 and maxScore = 11000.636364.
> > >(real example :)
> > >
> > >Therefore, with the attached patch, Display::generateStars does not
> > >return any stars, if minScore and maxScore are too close. The chosen
> > >threshold MINSCOREDIFF probably needs to be adjusted.
> >
> > This is a good point. Certainly this could be an attribute.
>
> Yikes! I can see the flood of "what happened to the stars?" complaints
> right now! If this change goes in, it should definitely be optional,
> and off by default.
You're probably right: omitting the stars entirely is not such a good
idea. On the other hand, with the example abvoe, giving the match with
score=11000.09 one star and the match with score=11000.63 five stars is
somewhat "exaggerating". Therefore, a kind of "mixing" the absolute and
relative scores might be better. A suggestion:
(score - min) * score /((max - min) * max)
Abel
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig3-dev mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
