52 lines
1.9 KiB
Markdown
52 lines
1.9 KiB
Markdown
|
# Rating ★★★★☆ & Ranking 🥉🥇🥈
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Ratings are a categorization of works into groups of equal merit/worth.**\
|
||
|
|
The categories can be a binary _good_/_bad_, the classic x-out-of-5 stars, or up to a 0-to-100 rating.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Ranking is an ordering of works based on their merit/worth.**\
|
||
|
|
A ranking is like a rating with each work being its own category and the value intervals between the categories don't have to be uniform.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## What's the point?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Organizing the Library
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- search filters
|
||
|
|
- automatic lists
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Make Public
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- [p2p](./p2p-sharing.md) needs to be implemented
|
||
|
|
- recommendations based on other users' stuff
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Problem: The granularity is too low
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
For any granularity lower than the number of works to be rated there is a chance of conflict: "I think this one is better than the other, but not as good as to give it the next grade."
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Solutions
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Use unrestricted granularity (64-bit)**\
|
||
|
|
This also allows the user to defined an arbitrary amount of rating categories.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Problem: Opinions can change over time
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Ratings given years ago reflect the opinions of the user at that time. They may not be accurate any more.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Solutions
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Motivate the user to always compare works.**\
|
||
|
|
\*insert good UX here\*
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Problem: Some works are not "fair" to compare
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Different things are liked for different factors. Sometimes a one-dimensional comparison in form of a rating/ranking doesn't make sense.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Solutions
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Make aspects of works rateable.**\
|
||
|
|
An aspect is a rateable part of a work. In other words: If you can say how good a work does something, that something is an aspect. This also is a way to avoid tags which are not objective, making them an aspect instead.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Misc
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**The under-educated statistician inside me wants the ratings to follow some distribution.**\
|
||
|
|
This would combine ranking and rating. Ranking with the combination of a static (but customizable) distribution results in a rating for each work.
|