not less than

[Walter Little]

It's not so much a matter of the precision, as one can easily adjust their
criteria by one integer (i.e. score>=90 can be score>89). In fact, that is
how I would define it anyway, as that is how I think about such things.
However, I can also see how some users would find it more intuitive to use
greater than or equal to. That is the basis toward my saying it would be
nice to have - solely on the merits of being intuitive for the largest
number of people possible (within, of course, reasonable bounds). With
regards to the original poster's point, we could even have a "not" checkbox
in front of the condition, as that might be intuitive for some people.
Beyond those sorts of things, however, I wouldn't suggest making it
encapsulate too many possibilities as it would become less useful by virtue
of having *too* many options.

-wpl

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Ian Monroe <ian at monroe.nu> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:00 PM, Walter Little <walterplittle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree that "greater than or equal" and "less than or equal" are useful
> > and would be nice to have in future versions of Amarok.
> >
> > -wpl
>
>
> When is that sort of precision needed?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok mailing list
> Amarok at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok/attachments/20080423/f4ae136f/attachment.html>