Re: Usability: Technical details in package descriptions?
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 08:32:50 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Tille <email@example.com> said:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2005, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>>> A 'normal' user doesn't know what C, C++ and Perl are.
>> The "user" I am creating packages for does. I am not really that
>> interested in working for user who do not know the distinction,
>> personally speaking.
> So your "personal" target user might be able to find out the
> programming language himself and mentioning it in the description is
> also redundant.
I am the prime representative of my target user. I use
aptitude; hit u to upgrade, look at the new package list, and try to
decide which of these new packages to install. The information in the
Description field is far from redundant here.
--> We found another reason to leave the language out of the
If this is an example of the illogic governing the move to
get useful information out of descriptions, to facour dumbing down
and simplifying for users who seem to be confused by the littlelest
things, I see no reason to favour the proposal.
If the proponents of this proposal are so desparate to stretch
things in order to make up support for the proposal out of whole
cloth, surely there must be something wrong with the proposal? Or
else why are people being so shrill?
Indeed, this leap of illogic is disturbing in its own right.
"If a camel flies, no one laughs if it doesn't get very far." Paul
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C