ngraham added a comment.
In D23270#515102 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D23270#515102>, @aspotashev wrote: > I don't like this change because it introduces a Plasma-specific formula and makes the user guess how to match "degradation: 21%" against let's say "capacity: 85%" s/he saw when using a different OS or desktop environment. For example: > > 1. User looks at battery status in Plasma 5.16 and remembers battery capacity is 85%, > 2. User updates to Plasma 5.17 and now there is "degradation 21%". How does one know if battery health improved or worsened over time and if the change was substantial? I think the more likely scenario is as follows: 1. User looks at battery status in Plasma 5.16, sees "capacity" at 85%, and has no idea what this means, because it implies that the battery is 85% charged but this can't be the case as other stats conflict with this interpretation 2. User updates to Plasma 5.17 and now there is "Degradation 21%". User now understands that this means their battery capacity is degraded. Maybe the string could be even further improved as "Capacity degredation:" as @meven suggested. At least, that's how it was for me. I did not understand what "Capacity:" was referring to until I started browsing the code. "Capacity" is an ambiguous and non-descriptive term that does not really communicate the concept we're trying to get across. REPOSITORY R102 KInfoCenter BRANCH capacity-to-degradation (branched from master) REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D23270 To: ngraham, meven, broulik, #vdg, #plasma, filipf Cc: aspotashev, filipf, plasma-devel, LeGast00n, The-Feren-OS-Dev, jraleigh, fbampaloukas, GB_2, ragreen, Pitel, ZrenBot, himcesjf, lesliezhai, ali-mohamed, jensreuterberg, abetts, sebas, apol, mart
