# Difference between revisions of "User:Nikki/Recording lengths 2"

(initial page) |
m (→I think the mode is better than the median, because ...: actual track length) |
||

Line 20: | Line 20: | ||

=== I think the mode is better than the median, because ... === | === I think the mode is better than the median, because ... === | ||

+ | * An actual track length. [[User:JonnyJD|JonnyJD]] ([[User talk:JonnyJD|talk]]) 03:12, 26 February 2013 (UTC) | ||

=== The median and the mode both suck! I think we should ... === | === The median and the mode both suck! I think we should ... === |

## Revision as of 03:12, 26 February 2013

After the initial round of feedback, all except one person who responded supported always setting recording lengths automatically. We decided in a dev chat that we will always set them automatically and we are focusing on how to calculate the the length. As in the initial round of feedback, the discussion on this page does not apply to standalone recordings.

## Contents

## Determining the length

The goals I think we have when determining the length are:

- To use one of the actual track lengths.
- To avoid anomalous values, whether that's from appended silence, clipping or erroneous data.
- To avoid huge changes in lengths when data is added or removed (difficult with only one or two values however).

Given those goals:

- The mean (0 votes previously) does not fit, since it will often not return one of the actual track lengths.
- Sorting the releases and taking the length from the first one (0 votes previously) does not fit, since it does not avoid anomalous values and does not avoid huge changes in lengths when data is added or removed.
- Using the shortest length (2 votes previously) does not fit, because it does not avoid all anomalous values (it works for anomalies that make the track longer, but not ones which make it shorter) and also does not avoid huge changes in lengths when data is added or removed.

The two which do fit are the median (3 votes previously) and the mode (4 votes previously). The median is problematic when there are an even number of values, since then you normally take the mean of the two values, which would not necessarily result in an actual track length (e.g. given 3:00 and 5:00, it would give 4:00). The mode is also problematic when there are multiple modes (e.g. again, 3:00 and 5:00, neither is more common than the other). We could however avoid that problem by instead taking the shortest of the middle values or most common values for the median and mode respectively.

## Votes and reasons for how the length should be determined

### I think the median is better than the mode, because ...

### I think the mode is better than the median, because ...

### The median and the mode both suck! I think we should ...

### I still don't care, just calculate it automatically somehow.

## Which lengths should be included?

In the initial round of feedback there were some suggestions of only including lengths from releases with disc IDs if any of the releases have disc IDs. Which track lengths should be included for determining the recording length?