add section 2: methodology for approaching & evaluating solutions

[tantek]

Add a draft section 2, methodology for approaching & evaluating solutions

[jyasskin]

Would it make sense to look at deployed experience in the form of custom elements? Similar to how we'd look at user experience with https://github.com/github/relative-time-element and friends when evaluating this sort of proposal around time.

[tantek]

Would it make sense to look at deployed experience in the form of custom elements? Similar to how we'd look at user experience with https://github.com/github/relative-time-element and friends when evaluating this sort of proposal around time.

Yes, as part of the next section, "3. prior/existing features (if any) and existing proposals (if any) that attempt to solve the problem(s)" as noted in https://github.com/mozilla/explainers/?tab=readme-ov-file#explainer-sections. I'll be writing that up next as a separate PR.

Also thanks for the link to relative-time-element, going to use that as part of another Explainer I'm working on for expanding the <time> element.

[martinthomson]

This raises a question for me. Is "amount" a count or is it a metric? As named, it strongly implies a count.

An amount is counting and that doesn't need units. Displaying a count might involve localization "10,000" vs. "10.000" or even abbreviation "10k". The range of options is limited.

A metric is a number, which can include negatives (-10°F) and fractional or decimal parts. That has the same localization concerns apply, but the catch is that there are now units to consider, which makes it far more substantive an effort to define and implement.

[martinthomson]

It might pay to note that currency conversions do not meet this standard because they are subjective or changing.

[martinthomson]

Oh, I just realized that the currency thing makes this far more interesting than before if you think about the presentation of counts vs. metrics. Currency amounts are a count not a metric.

[tantek]

do not meet this standard because they are subjective or changing

This brings up a meta-point, which is where to document what is deliberately "out of scope" for an Explainer.

I think section "8. caveats, shortcomings, and other drawbacks of design choices, both current and any prior iterations" is suitable for this purpose, in order to keep section 1 simpler and shorter. I'm open to alternative suggestions.

Update: captured meta-point in #25

[tantek]

This raises a question for me. Is "amount" a count or is it a metric? As named, it strongly implies a count.
An amount is counting and that doesn't need units.

Amounts can be unitless or have units. From a prose / common language perspective; there is overlap and no strict separation. An "amount" can be a purely numerical count (perhaps fractional) or have units, such as the "amounts of ingredients in a recipe", since recipe ingredients often have units (one does not say "metrics of ingredients in a recipe" which has zero literal quoted results in DDG and Google Search whereas the former has numerous results).

Displaying a count might involve localization "10,000" vs. "10.000" or even abbreviation "10k". The range of options is limited.

Or "1,5" vs. "1.5".

A metric is a number, which can include negatives (-10°F) and fractional or decimal parts. That has the same localization concerns apply, but the catch is that there are now units to consider, which makes it far more substantive an effort to define and implement.

Fortunately there is plenty of prior work to build on, such as SI units and e.g. Apple OS units and measures types.