John Stracke wrote:
And the authors do caution that their numbers are blind to the quality
of
the RFCs. Their point, though, is that looking at the easy metrics is
better than not measuring anything at all;
Wrong information is worse than no information. If the results don't
mean anything,
They don't mean *much*, but I wouldn't say they mean *nothing*.
why measure?
As a research effort. The current draft admits that the results are not
directly useful. But we'll never get techniques that do give useful
results unless somebody starts trying.
/===========================================================\
|John Stracke |Principal Engineer |
|jstracke(_at_)incentivesystems(_dot_)com |Incentive Systems, Inc. |
|http://www.incentivesystems.com |My opinions are my own. |
|===========================================================|
|"This horse has made a career out of being dead." -- Harald|
|Alvestrand |
\===========================================================/