[open-economics] Fwd: http://www.yourtopia.net/quiz/2
digitalepourpre at gmail.com
Fri Jan 14 07:47:20 UTC 2011
These are valuable suggestions - and underline the need for a better
I will have some more time over the weekend to add a more detailled
documentation. Afaik Dirk is improving the wording of the questions:
Originally, we were concerned with framing effects so that is why the
wording has been rather monotonous. For now, I think it's important to
make this as much fun as possible, so we shouldn't worry too much
Also, we should keep in mind that we always have a batch of questions
and dimensions left (also to cover green preferences like environment)
- in the long-run we would need to incorporate this too. i will update
the issues in bitbucket.
I also wanted to work on the look and feel of /result.
Anyway, I'm very confident about this program - I'm working myself
through the Python book atm so I will hopefully be able to join in
some serious coding soon.
PS: Rufus: I have just pulled the recent version - I wonder why I get
an error once I am on /quiz/2. The output is:
line 889, in __call__
return self.wsgi_app(environ, start_response)
line 879, in wsgi_app
response = self.make_response(self.handle_exception(e))
line 876, in wsgi_app
rv = self.dispatch_request()
line 695, in dispatch_request
File "c:\wwwroot\openhdi\openhdi\app.py", line 103, in quiz_question
questions['weight'] = questions['weight'] + (100-total)
IndexError: list index out of range
Please let me know if there is some other *.py I need to init.
On 14 January 2011 03:46, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org> wrote:
> Forwarding to the open-economics list (which you're on ;) )
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Tim Hubbard
> Date: 12 January 2011 22:37
> Subject: http://www.yourtopia.net/quiz/2
> To: Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
> Hi Rufus,
> Happy New Year!
> Just taking a quick look at http://www.yourtopia.net/. Impressive for
> a weekends work.
> I had a go at doing the quiz, but the problem I came up again was that
> the consequence of the weightings can be ambiguous.
> For example, on section 2
> Long-term unemployment (% of total unemployment)
> I assume increasing the weight results in greater value being given to
> lower unemployment, but it doesn't say that that is the direction
> Household final consumption expenditure PPP (constant 2005 international $)
> Greens for example, might want to value low values of consumption,
> whereas I assume you mean high values here are given more weight?
> I guess I should look at the code to see how the functions work!
> Best wishes,
> open-economics mailing list
> open-economics at lists.okfn.org
More information about the open-economics