Re: gUM's optional constraints algorithm penalizes user-choice chasing best-match for webpage

Le samedi 31 août 2013 à 10:26 -0700, Martin Thomson a écrit :
> On 31 August 2013 00:43, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <> wrote:
> > The reason this works is that our (unchanged) core "remove-from-list"
> > algorithm ignores zero-reducing optional constraints, which makes it more
> > lenient the smaller the starting set is.
> I'd go even further and not remove anything that is marked with an
> optional constraint.  I'd use optional constraints to select a
> default, and maybe to order sources.

That also sounds good to me as well; in particular, it reduces the
unbalance of optional constraints as a all or nothing approach (either
all the optional constraints are satisfied, or none will be particularly
sought to be satisfied).

This would mean changing the constraint algorithm so that the
secondPassSet doesn't replace candidateSet, but instead is used by the
UA to help the user select an appropriate device (the details of which
would be left up to the UA).


Received on Monday, 2 September 2013 05:56:08 UTC