[AppStream] Putting review data into AppStream

[Matthias Klumpp]

2016-07-20 10:49 GMT+02:00 Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com>:
> On 20 July 2016 at 09:29, Matthias Klumpp <matthias at tenstral.net> wrote:
>>  [...]
>> So, a <lang/> or <language/> tag makes sense to me here. (complex
>> translation logic is also not useful in a web-server context, where I
>> guess we just request the reviews for a specific language anyway)
>
> Sure. The language code also means some more things, e.g. gnome-maps
> might work fine in England but not work in Somalia, so it doesn't make
> sense to translate the en_GB translation for all countries.

Yes

>>> <reviews>
>>>   <review id="3045" karma="35" date="2016-07-01" rating_percent="80">
>>
>> This would make it a review-id, not a reviewer-id. This looks like a
>> unique identifier for the particular review, rather than one for the
>> particular reviewer.
>
> So, we probably need both :)

What would the review-id be used for? Ordering? As token to
communicate with the review server when submitting
"helpful/not-helpful" sign for the review?

>> <reviews>
>>   <review karma="35" date="2016-07-01" rating_percent="80" xml:lang="en_GB">
>
> So, two things:
>
> * rating_percent seems quite verbose. Maybe just "percent"?

Maybe just rating? Percent is way too generic, and rating makes clear
that, well, this is a rating. We can say that this is a value between
0 and 100 in the spec.

> * xml:lang isn't designed to be used on the parent tag; only on the
> tag that's translated (as I understand it).

We are not using it that way for <description/> in distro XML...

> I think using
> <lang>en_GB</lang> is probably best here.

I slightly prefer that as well... Its a bit weird to have the
abbreviation though, "lang" is the only thing in the spec that is
abbreviated.
But consistency >> pedanticness of naming, so let's go with <lang/>.

>>     <reviewer_name>Richard Hughes</reviewer_name>
>>     <reviewer_id>3045</reviewer_id>
>
> Looks good to me.

+1 on that

Matthias