merge request: Automated Playlist Generator

[Thomas Pfeiffer]

> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Colin Kern <colin.kern at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Another issue I
> > have (and this is also an issue with dynamic playlists) is the
> > strictness value is not very clear.  If it's doing the same thing as
> > the fuzzy bias in dynamic playlists (controlling the standard
> > deviation) then referring to it as a percentage from 0 to 100 doesn't
> > really make much sense and it isn't clear to the user what it's doing.
> 
> Showing the margin of error or the confidence interval for the
> "strictness" is going to be pretty difficult, and I don't think it
> would be any less confusing than having the strictness value as a
> percent.  My idea is to do something similar to the "optimization"
> slider in the browser: have a slider with no numerical markings with
> "strict match" on one side, and "[some word that means the opposite of
> strict] match" on the other.  But I'm not sure what to call put there.
>  I've thought of the following:
> 
> - "fuzzy match"
> - "loose match"
> - "approximate match"
> 
> Let me know what makes the most sense (or suggest something else), and
> I'll put it in.  Thanks.

Very good idea. Since the mathematics are too complicated for most people to 
understand anyway, we shouldn't bother them with numbers at all (better show 
nothing than incorrect information).
I'd vote for "loose match", since we already have "fuzzy bias" and don't want 
the two to be confused. Approximate would be the opposite of "exact" rather 
than "strict". 
Although the pair "exact match" and "approximate match" would work as well 
imo.

Regards,
Thomas