On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 02:12:38PM +0800, David Nickerson wrote:
> Wilfred Li wrote:
> > Maybe instead of the star system, which may be open to interpretation at
> > first sight, an abbreviation or a specific word may be used to represent
> > its status?
>
> I guess that if you use something that looks fairly common and standard
> people will think they know what it means without looking for an actual
> meaning (i.e., the more stars the better), whereas if you use something
> a bit different (plain text or graphical) then people are more likely to
> look-up and try to understand the meaning and implications.
>
> The trick is that if its too different, then it may just turn people off
> all together...
>
> Maybe just a simple list of checkboxes with the labels: Level 1, Level
> 2,... would suffice? The labels could then be links to the appropriate
> definitions.
I like that sound of that. Certainly you need some format where it is
possible to say that a model is level 2 without being level 1, which a
simple row of stars cannot express.
Stars are probably still appropriate for the tool-specific displays
though: 1 if it loads, 2 if it also runs, etc.
Jonathan.
--
Jonathan Cooper MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] www: jonc.me.uk/
Politics is a field where the choice lies constantly between 2 blunders.
- John Morley MP
_______________________________________________
cellml-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
