On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 06:20:24PM -0600, Brian Fahrlander wrote: > On Fri, 2005-01-07 at 17:35 -0600, Paul Kuliniewicz wrote: > [snipped] > > But more importantly, why is it necessary to round off ratings in the > > Bonobo interface anyway? It should be the client's responsibility to > > decide whether it wants to see the true rating or a user-friendlier > > version of it; if it wants the latter, it can round the value itself. > > It should be a simple matter of changing "long" to "float" in a few > > places in Rhythmbox.idl (and the corresponding spots in the code). I > > can't think of a good reason offhand why this shouldn't be done. > > I'm a big fan of seeing the numbers; the 1-5 rating system is waaay > to vague for me. I just have no use for it; a single star is 20%, FCOL. > I would support a measure to have them removed, but I think some people > would see the current system as 'friendly' until they got serious about > it. > > I like the idea...a lot! Changing the way ratings are presented in the Bonobo bindings, of course, has no effect on how ratings are presented to the user. The change I propose just makes it possible for other programs to get accurate ratings information. Exposing a more finely-grained rating to the user is a separate issue.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature