[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: electronics-menu REJECTED (discussion)

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, José L. Redrejo Rodríguez wrote:

And here we have good chances for a flame because I as a user would
not expect Science and Math under a main menu "Technical".  I'd rather
see "Science" as a main menu entry and find "Math" below this.  I
do not say that my point of view is correct but there is no "correct"
location for the sections and it mainly depends from users view where
he might search for certain topics.  That's my arguing for grouping
users according to their views and care for them in sub projects
were you are able to do reasonable guessings where a user would
suspect certain applications.  This was one sense for the Debian-Med
project because every user of this project will definitely enter
the "Med" main menu and can easily proceed from there.  For these
users the "Technical" menu section would be of low use.

And another flame decission chance comes when you have to decide if an
application should be under , e.g., Education/electronics or
Technical/Electronics. As an example, where do you think qucs[1] should
be placed? It's wonderfull to study at a deep level how solid state
circuits work, but also wonderful for secondary school children to study
and simulate digital and analogic circuits...

But your argument exactly supports my position that the place
where a user expects a program depends from the tasks a user has to
do.  So we need user groups first and afterwards we need the
apropriate menus.  It's hard to believe but people (sometimes we
forget that users are people ;-)) are different and there is no
really good way to find a general menu.

So, if the right profiles are installed in the system, with
apt-get install <application>
the user will see the application in a different branch depending of the
system groups he belongs.

I did not dived very deeply into this but does "system group"
here UNIX group or is this even transparent for LDAP using systems etc.?

Kind regards



Reply to: