- Poor Bad
- Fair Below average
- Average
- Good
- Excellent
Terminology of rating system
Moderators: XnTriq, helmut, xnview
-
- Moderator & Librarian
- Posts: 6390
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Ref Desk
Terminology of rating system
IMO the terminology (in both XnView v1.9 and MP) should be changed to what seems to be the standard for 5-star rating systems:
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 2010
- Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
- Location: Sarasota Florida
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:05 pm
- Location: UK
Re: Terminology of rating system
Good suggestion +1
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 2443
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 6:31 am
-
- Posts: 8705
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Re: Terminology of rating system
+1 (Just wondering what the equivalent standard in German is...)
-
- Posts: 215
- Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 7:03 am
Re: Terminology of rating system
Hello,
Si changement accepté !
Traduction en français
Poor : ne pas traduire par "Pauvre" mais "Médiocre"
Fair : ne pas traduire par "Juste" mais "Raisonnable"
Exemple : Google traduction utilise le premier sens des termes
Si changement accepté !
Traduction en français
Poor : ne pas traduire par "Pauvre" mais "Médiocre"
Fair : ne pas traduire par "Juste" mais "Raisonnable"
Exemple : Google traduction utilise le premier sens des termes
-
- Moderator & Librarian
- Posts: 6390
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Ref Desk
Re: Terminology of rating system
This has been updated in MP, but — as of v1.99.6 — it's still the same in XnView “Classic”.
-
- Moderator & Librarian
- Posts: 6390
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Ref Desk
Re: Terminology of rating system
All versions of XnView should use the same terminology in their rating system:
- Excellent
- Good
- Average
- Fair Below average
- Poor Bad
-
- Posts: 8705
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Re: Terminology of rating system
Thanks for raising this issue again, XnTriq. Before changing the English terms for rating in XnView Classic I'd like to discuss the current rating terminology.
When translating the current English terms (see above) to German it's not easy to find the matching words for the English ratings. Translating in other languages might also be difficult. Independantly from each other Herb and I found a different rating terminology which is both clear and very simple to translate into other languages. I've read some few sources and found a the ranking terminology Herb and I have in mind in Wording for rating scales (University of Wisconsin-Extension) for example. The rating mentioned there is a balanced (symmetric) rating:
1. Very good
2. Good
3. Neutral
4. Bad
5. Very bad
Other terms and ranges are also possible, e.g.:
1. Good
2. Above average
3. Average
4. Below average
5. Bad
Not sure whether a balanced rating is better for rating images or not. But I guess it's the balance / symmetry which makes translating into other languages easier. And when switching from one language to another it's less likely that the rating has a (slightly) different meaning. So I think a balanced (symmetric) rating is the way to go.
Other opinions? Is someone familiar with 5 star rating terminology in multiple languages?
When translating the current English terms (see above) to German it's not easy to find the matching words for the English ratings. Translating in other languages might also be difficult. Independantly from each other Herb and I found a different rating terminology which is both clear and very simple to translate into other languages. I've read some few sources and found a the ranking terminology Herb and I have in mind in Wording for rating scales (University of Wisconsin-Extension) for example. The rating mentioned there is a balanced (symmetric) rating:
1. Very good
2. Good
3. Neutral
4. Bad
5. Very bad
Other terms and ranges are also possible, e.g.:
1. Good
2. Above average
3. Average
4. Below average
5. Bad
Not sure whether a balanced rating is better for rating images or not. But I guess it's the balance / symmetry which makes translating into other languages easier. And when switching from one language to another it's less likely that the rating has a (slightly) different meaning. So I think a balanced (symmetric) rating is the way to go.
Other opinions? Is someone familiar with 5 star rating terminology in multiple languages?
-
- XnThusiast
- Posts: 4187
- Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:45 am
- Location: Cheltenham, U.K.
Re: Terminology of rating system
My initial reaction on reading XnTriq's post today was that 'Average' and 'Fair' have about the same meaning to me in English; then I read the whole thread, and saw that they corresponded to the rating system in some other software, and they had in the past received strong support.helmut wrote:Other opinions?
I think the latest suggested wording is much clearer (although personally I would differ from the University of Wisconsin in preferring 'Poor' and 'Very poor' to 'Bad' and 'Very bad').
-
- Moderator & Librarian
- Posts: 6390
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Ref Desk
Re: Terminology of rating system
- xkcd
- Wikipedia
- Likert-type scales
- Clemson University: Likert-Type Scale Response Anchors
- Iowa State University: Likert Scale Examples for Surveys
- SurveyLegend: What are Likert-Type Scale Responses, when to use them + lots of examples
- Wiley Online Library
- Types of Quality and Outcomes Measures: Rating satisfaction research — Is it poor, fair, good, very good, or excellent?
- Peter Krogh: The DAM Book (Digital Asset Management for Photographers)
- ASMP dpBestflow: Metadata » Ratings
- O'Reilly Media: Managing Digital Images » Applying Ratings and Keywords
- Google Books: Prioritizing images with ratings
- Christopher Allen
Linguee (English-German Dictionary: “[url=http://www.linguee.com/english-german/translation/poor+fair+good+very+good+excellent.html]poor fair good very good excellent”[/url]) wrote:Code: Select all
1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good; 4 - very good; 5 - excellent. 1 - mangelhaft; 2 - befriedigend; 3 - gut; 4 - sehr gut; 5 - hervorragend.
-
- Posts: 8705
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Re: Terminology of rating system
Thank you for the many links and references, XnTriq. I haven't read all the documents and articles - what I understood is:
- Ratings for images should have one rating for out-takes/crap which can be deleted later and apart from this a diversity of "good" ratings (means a non-balanced rating).
- There is a kind of "standard" for quality ratings in general which is in English "1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good; 4 - very good; 5 - excellent.".
Right?
- Ratings for images should have one rating for out-takes/crap which can be deleted later and apart from this a diversity of "good" ratings (means a non-balanced rating).
- There is a kind of "standard" for quality ratings in general which is in English "1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good; 4 - very good; 5 - excellent.".
Right?
-
- Moderator & Librarian
- Posts: 6390
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Ref Desk
Re: Terminology of rating system
At least this seems to be the most commonly used wording when it comes to 5-point (vs. 7-point etc.) rating systems for quality (vs. level of agreement/difficulty/priority etc.) in questionnaires (survey research).helmut wrote:There is a kind of "standard" for quality ratings in general which is in English "1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good; 4 - very good; 5 - excellent.".
I was hoping for a standard terminology in metadata formats such as IPTC and XMP or even ID3, but to my surprise, there are no such guidelines or recommendations.
The “ratings pyramid”…helmut wrote:Ratings for images should have one rating for out-takes/crap which can be deleted later and apart from this a diversity of "good" ratings (means a non-balanced rating).
- 5 stars
4 stars
3 stars
2 stars
1 star
Neutral
Outtakes
- XnView Forum
- Envato Tuts+
- YouTube
- KDE Documentation
-
- Posts: 8705
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
- Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Re: Terminology of rating system
Thanks for looking up and providing the most important links, XnTriq. From what I can see, the rating pyramid with its ratings "outtakes", "neutral", and 1-5 stars is the way to go. As a side effect the translation problem would be solved.
I wonder what to do about existing ratings. Perhaps existing ratings could be migrated automatically using a predefined mapping when installing the XnView version with the new rating system.
Do other users agree? Other opinions?
(Please note that a decision on this matter or even a change in XnView shouldn't be made quickly because of the big effect on existing ratings.)
I wonder what to do about existing ratings. Perhaps existing ratings could be migrated automatically using a predefined mapping when installing the XnView version with the new rating system.
Do other users agree? Other opinions?
(Please note that a decision on this matter or even a change in XnView shouldn't be made quickly because of the big effect on existing ratings.)
-
- Moderator & Librarian
- Posts: 6390
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 3:00 am
- Location: Ref Desk
Re: Terminology of rating system
If I'm not mistaken, all we need is the already requested flag or picks feature in addition to the star rating that's already in place.
- unrated = neutral
- black flag = rejected = outtakes
- white flag = accepted