assuming Version 1.0 is 100% and v0.23 is 23%)
That is not how version numbering is usually done. Not that there is any "right" way to increment version numbers, any developer can decide to do whatever they want to do with those. They could solely be using prime numbers if they wanted. But the most common way to do it is to simply increment the build number (the one after the first dot) until you release a new (complete) version. (version being indicated by the first number)
You don't have to increment up to v0.99 to get to v1.00. In fact you could go beyond v0.100 (e.g. v0.169) before getting to v1.0.
I sometimes see people complaining about there being "barely any content" with new games that are on (e.g) v0.2, because they believe the game is 20% done, while it's simply the second build. These numbers are not decimal numbers. Meaning this game is currently on the 23rd build, no more information can be read from the version number.
As an example of a dev that uses a more uncommon approach you can look at NLT, they actually do go for %-completed in their build number, however they also include the month and the numbers 1 or 2 for first or second release in a month.
The third number is used to indicate new releases of the same build, usually used for updates that include fixes instead of new content. What you then end up with is a series of three
You must be registered to see the links
, indicating the following: version
.build
.release
Yes, I'm fun at parties, but noone ever follows my invitations. I'm not sure why.