Jan Brasna wrote:
If you have a methodology that works, is almost accurate and you know
there are no quirks in how any agent could misbehave, then you're
fine.
UAs don't always behave uniformly in their engagement of sites, through
their own upgrading-cycles, so there should be plenty of room for
"quirks" here.
If you're not interested in absolute numbers (that may wary due to
particular implementation of methodology), but only in trends and
ratios, you should be fine.
How large variations one should calculate in just to get the trends
fairly accurate, is still unclear. Since some use UA-trends and -ratios
in decision-making - or to check/confirm their decisions, the numbers,
thus the methodology, seems to matter.
Not that I personally need to know how to extract fairly accurate
UA-ratios since I'm only interested in visiting/using-trends -
regardless of UAs. However, it seems like it is possible to get some
"quirks" in those trends too, so how big a "pinch of salt" should one
add just to be (somewhat) on the safe side?
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
