Closed aaronkaplan closed 7 years ago
@aaronkaplan thanks for flagging. I'm not completely clear from reading the report where we are missing this - do you mean that we don't report ranks or that the computation of the underlying metric is wrong? (I also took metrics to mean the numbers and the rank is something we can compute from the metric but that is semantics!).
If you mean we don't display ranks atm, I can confirm that we do: both via the API and in the frontend e.g. on the country pages.
We don't display them on the /country/ page yet because of issues in the ux of doing this - see https://github.com/cybergreen-net/stats-new/issues/194
@rufuspollock so I was referring to two things:
I understand the UX difficulties there. But... we need to show the rank. Thanks
INVALID / DUPLICATE. The issue is not showing the rank - this was discussed in cybergreen-net/stats-new#194 (we also discussed with @YurieIto and said that some of this would not be shipped necessarily for the 15th of March).
To record the specific issue of showing ranks on the country page we've created this issue. Please follow up there for more on this:
To be precise, we did not fully implement the specs of the CG metric - as described by Dr. Dan Geer. http://www.cybergreen.net/img/medialibrary/CyberGreen%20Metrics%20v.2.pdf
Please note that on page 6, there is a description of the metrics. However, we omitted the rank. I think we have to export the rank (as sequence number in the table) as well as in the /api/*