I have a book on applied statistics that uses a result I don't understand. The example in the book begins with Bayes' theorem applied to hypothesis $H$ and data $D$:
$$P(H|D) = \frac{P(D|H) P(H)}{P(D|\neg H) P(\neg H) + P(D|H) P(H)} \tag{1}$$
In the example it is given that $P(H) = P(\neg H) = 0.5$. This simplifies the equation for $P(H|D)$ since $P(H)$ and $P(\neg H)$ cancel:
$$P(H|D) = \frac{P(D|H)}{P(D|\neg H) + P(D|H)} \tag{2}$$
It is also given that we do not have a model for $P(D|H)$ so we are to assume that each value of $P(D|H)$ is equally likely (i.e., "the unknown value for $P(D|H)$ is uniformly distributed over the interval $[0,1]$").
Given the uniform distribution of $P(D|H)$, the following equation for $P(H|D)$ is stated:
$$P(H|D) = 1-P(D|\neg H) * ln(\frac{1 + P(D|\neg H)}{P(D|\neg H)}) \tag{3}$$
In the example, $P(D|\neg H)$ is known so equation $(3)$ can be used to solve for $P(H|D)$). This concludes the book's example.
However, I do not understand the justification for going from equation $(2)$ to $(3)$. Can anyone enlighten me as to how assuming $P(D|H)$ is uniformly distributed over $[0,1]$ allows for result $(3)$?