Hi, On Sat, 23 Jun 2007, René Scharfe wrote: > Johannes Schindelin schrieb: > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, David Kastrup wrote: > >> The people I know will expect "100% identical" or even "100.0% > >> identical" to mean identical, period. They will be quite surprised to > >> hear that "99.95%" is supposed to be included. > > > > Granted, 100.0% means as close as you can get to "completely" with 4 > > digits. But if you have an integer, you better use the complete range, > > rather than arbitrarily make one number more important than others. > > > > For if you see an integer, you usually assume a rounded value. If you > > don't, you're hopeless. > > Why hopeless? It's a useful convention to define "100%" as "complete > (not rounded)". By the same reasoning, you could say "never round down to 0%, because I want to know when there is no similarity". You cannot be exact when you have to cut off fractions, so why try for _exactly_ one number? Ciao, Dscho
