Rob Lewis wrote on Jun 1^st, 2012 at 4:56pm:

Rob, for sure, stars add value to the program.  My point vis à vis tags was to help you find a workaround in this app, for the time being.  And actually, your star thinking helped me deepen my tag use, so thanks

I use stars all the time - heavily - in Lightroom, a bit in iTunes and agree with their value in some circumstances in BookMacster.  They probably will not be used much by me in BookMacster at this time (especially given their evolutionary state) nor in the future. If I were to suggest to Jerry as to where to put the love, I would say to deepen tag functionality and a few other features first, as a priority, but I would keep stars on the list for sure.

I'm using BookMacster every day and it has given new life to (previously) mothballed stale closet of bookmarks.

Jerry Krinock wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:20pm:


I'll try to chime in more readily when/if I find things like that as I noticed that days ago (!)  The only other thing I noticed was a "sticky" Inspector window, but I think that is fixed too in 1.11.1 (?)  I'll keep my eyes open and post if needed.  Cheers.

Jerry Krinock wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 4:44pm:


I'm sure the usefulness will evolve - as you say, it's somewhat rudimentary.  I use stars in programs such as iTunes, & Adobe Photoshop Lightroom, so that I can quickly locate my "4 star photos" or my "4 star songs" etc. Perhaps similar to "Flags" in Mail.app where I might red flag a bill to be paid, etc.   So after rating by whichever I want to be able to find them quickly (as by a smart folder), which is why, for me, I associate it with a tag in BookMacster.  I'll be watching the evolution of stars but I don't find much in this for my needs at this time.  I am loving "Tags" however and they are factoring in big in my BookMacster world. 

(And this is off the topic of this post, but on the subject of the update to 1.11.1, I noticed that broken functionality in setting my client safe sync limit is now working with 1.11.1.  I'll open a new topic if you want, but, it's working, so perhaps moot   )

Hi Rob,
What might be an immediate solution is to use tags.  I know tags are not the same exactly, but it might be an immediate workaround for now.
I was just devising a tag layout for myself to flag websites to revisit, or that are pretty cool as you say, etc.
For you, I can imagine making you tags which are 1,2,3,4,5.  "The Tag Cloud is ordered alphanumerically starting at the top left." (from the Help item 2.1.2) and so your ratings would be the top thing in the Cloud.
For myself, I just made a tag "revisit often" and will refine my schema as the thought develops.   
Hope this thought is helpful. 
Clyde

Jerry Krinock wrote on Mar 15^th, 2012 at 11:33am:


Here's how I'd use it: I have scads of old bookmarks going back years. I certainly don't remember anything about many of them. Sometimes if I'm just looking for something interesting to check out, I'll visit a random old bookmark. If it had, say, a 4-star rating indicating "this is pretty cool" I'd have a better basis on which to select.

One should of course be able to sort on number of stars.

There is of course the argument "Well, if you didn't think it was worthwhile, why did you bookmark it in the first place?" But I'd respond that 1 star means it exceeds some minimum level of coolness; worthwhile if not enthralling. And of course, things change. I might want to change a star rating if either the site or my tastes evolve over time.

I was wishing for a way to rank my bookmarks in terms of how much I like them. How about the typical "1 to 5 stars" idea, like iTunes, iPhoto, and many other programs?

If you like the idea, there should be this clarification: 0 stars doesn't mean "bottom of the barrel"; it should mean "no star rating assigned yet".