From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <gentoo-soc+bounces-713-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>) id 1MklYk-0001MZ-T5 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2009 21:15:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 78102E0760; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 21:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay06.ispgateway.de (smtprelay06.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.29]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 498D6E0760 for <gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 21:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [85.179.8.87] (helo=[192.168.0.3]) by smtprelay06.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from <webmaster@hartwork.org>) id 1MklYj-0003wj-6B for gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:15:33 +0200 Message-ID: <4AA577F4.6010601@hartwork.org> Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:15:32 +0200 From: Sebastian Pipping <webmaster@hartwork.org> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090820) Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-soc+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-soc+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-soc+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-soc.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-soc@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-soc] Congratulations! References: <20090824210251.GB27970@comet> <200909060945.12046.arne_bab@web.de> <4AA3DBDB.4010101@hartwork.org> <200909070012.01587.arne_bab@web.de> <4AA44CB3.5040905@hartwork.org> <4AA450B6.1080006@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4AA450B6.1080006@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Df-Sender: 874396 X-Archives-Salt: 054faa6a-655f-405d-bcc0-11d4e458bf35 X-Archives-Hash: ab1fe70a9bda913899f30d20effe1b80 Jeremy Olexa wrote: > Sebastian Pipping wrote: > >> I have triggered report re-creation, your data is now included: >> http://smolt.hartwork.org:45678/static/stats/gentoo.html > > I notice an inconsistency. Everything is sorted by popularity, except > "Archs", "Chosts", & "System profiles" - By design? It is hard to read > at first glance and could get worse as more data is submitted. By design, yes. I made an exception with these as I felt it would not be right with these tables. In general a user can seek for the answer to (at least) these two different questions: - What's the top 1, top 2, top 3 - How does item X (e.g. use flag "mp3") rank Doing both in a static table can only be done with JavaScript magic that's currently beyond my expertise. As a result I had to choose between sort-by-popularity and sort-alphabetically. While a user can still answer the "how does item X rank" question using browser text search determining the top N from the table in his head alone can be quite a hard task. So I think the sort-by-popularity approach mainly "hurts less". I'm open to suggestions on how to improve presentation of the data. Sebastian