[hughes]

Hi delphin, I appreciate your reply:

Originally Posted by delphin

Sorry for the harsh response. I see that you now do have a category for Overdrive library services, and are adding a lot of new information.

I agree that having a single point objective comparison site would have a lot of value.

This is not an easy job though because there are so many nuances.

I would suggest is that you use at least a 5 point weighting system for your site.

For expressing preferences about features -

5 MUST HAVE
4 DESIRABLE TO HAVE
3 NEUTRAL (no preference, or don't care either way)
2 NOT DESIRABLE
1 MUST NOT HAVE

This gives you a MUST HAVE and MUST NOT HAVE set of conditions to define features that the buyer considers either essential or to be 'show stoppers' plus levels to express mild like, mild dislike, and don't care.

No problem. Critism beats being ignored, and I learned some things from your post.

You're definitely getting into key design issues here (and also when you mention weight assignments later in your message). Good and helpful insights. You can indeed expect to see expressions of degree (weights) in the future.

Right now, the system precisely implements three of your preference codes:

5 MUST HAVE: This is the checked box (marked "want").
3 NEUTRAL: This is the unset/open box (marked "unset").
1 MUST NOT HAVE: This is the x'ed box (marked "not want").

This preference system is so quick that it supports rapid exploration. I'll want the expressions of degree to be easy and quick too.

Supporting a "4 DESIRABLE TO HAVE" and a "2 NOT DESIRABLE TO HAVE" ahead of supporting full weight assignment? Interesting idea.

Thanks for the illustration via a factor for ereader MP3 quality player. That shows the nuances well. The guide currently use pros-and-cons lists within factors to express nuances for other factors.

I'll try tomorrow to publish updates with the promised touch-screen factor and initiate coverage of the PRS-650 and PRS-950 ereader alternatives.