Re: [Lzip-bug] Maybe replace "bits/byte" with "ratio"?

[Antonio Diaz Diaz]

Hi Timothy. Thanks for your comments.

Timothy Beryl Grahek wrote:
> I personally haven't found "bits/byte" useful at all; I actually, even
> now, don't understand what "bits/byte" actually means.

You can find a definition in the excellent book "Data Compression 
Explained"[1], by Matt Mahoney:
"Compression ratio is often measured by the size of the compressed 
output file, or in bits per character (bpc) meaning compressed bits per 
uncompressed byte."

[1] http://mattmahoney.net/dc/dce.html#Section_2

"bits/byte" is more useful in measuring the compression of text.


> but I can definitely say that the % saved part has been the most
> useful and #:# moderately useful. Showing the inverse compression ratio
> would be quite favorable to me, and would make Lzip output more tasteful
> to me as a whole. This, of course, is my humble opinion. :)

It is also my opinion, and as nobody has objected, I think I'll make 
lzip show the inverse compression ratio.


> >   vv52_new.log.lz: 15.329:1,  6.52% ratio, 93.48% saved.  ok
>
> Having both the saved and inverse values expressed as percentages seems
> like the better of the two options when considering decimal versus
> percentage.

Agreed. Two things I like of showing the inverse compression ratio as a 
percentage are that:
  1) It gives more precision because the integer part is almost always 0.
  2) It makes it easier to see that ratio + saved = 1 = 100%


> Thank you for asking for user opinion on this matter.

I find it the most natural to ask users about the user interface. :-)


Best regards,
Antonio.