>> And it would probably not be terribly kind to people who wanted to edit the items included on each list before limiting them; that is, selecting a maximum of x prompts would have to select them from the entire list, not any subset of the list, unless I wanted to hugely redo the code architecture. <<
I think the most efficient way would be to edit the list *after* trimming it. Say you pick 4 lists. The program cuts them all down to 10 prompts. You edit out 4 you don't want. Then you push the button and get a card.
Having a toggle on/off for the weighting feature would give people a choice. So if the editing is harder to do, or impossible, with the Equalize Weight option on, people still have the unequal option if they want to edit the lists a lot.
>> Still, it's an idea I can play around with. <<
Yay! I can usually frame my ideas in computer concepts. I am less good at guessing what is doable at this level of technology, let alone what is easy.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: Hmm...
Date: 2014-02-10 08:30 pm (UTC)I think the most efficient way would be to edit the list *after* trimming it. Say you pick 4 lists. The program cuts them all down to 10 prompts. You edit out 4 you don't want. Then you push the button and get a card.
Having a toggle on/off for the weighting feature would give people a choice. So if the editing is harder to do, or impossible, with the Equalize Weight option on, people still have the unequal option if they want to edit the lists a lot.
>> Still, it's an idea I can play around with. <<
Yay! I can usually frame my ideas in computer concepts. I am less good at guessing what is doable at this level of technology, let alone what is easy.