Bug#361418: Debian menu and the Apps/Science section
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 20:52, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 14.05.2006, 18:20 +0200 schrieb Thomas Walter:
> > On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 17:01, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > > Hello Debian Science people,
> > >
> > > There is a discussion (in bug #361418) on the future of the Debian
> > > menu structure. In case you missed it, we would like to have your
> > > opinions on the entries for scientific applications.
> > >
> > > The relevant sections are:
> > >
> > > Mathematics [was:Math]
> > > Mathematics-related software.
> > > gcalctool, snapea, xeukleides
> > >
> > > Science
> > > Software for natural and social sciences, humanities, etc.
> > > ncbi-epcr, earth3d, therion
> > >
> > > Please send comment to bug #361418.
> > >
> >
> > >From my point of view this 2 section names are arbitrary and too global.
> > It also opens a long discussion about the hirarchy.
>
> There is IMHO no need. Why not use the freedesktop.org's menu
> specification as reference? This would help to allow a user an easier
> orientation.
>
If I remember correct, I had a look at this definitions near the
beginning of the year.
There was also a thread talking about this categorisation suggested.
Pros and cons.
I assume this is based on 2 big groups where one put people in
50%: education <=> teaching
50$: education <=> anything
See below.
> > I think Mathematics
> > is also part of Science.
>
> ACK.
>
> > At least for application like axiom, octave,
> > mathematica, ...
> > So having a Math section in parallel to Science could be for more
> > "calulator" oriented SW.
>
> I don't think so. I know, OOo Math isn't a real scientific software. But
> there are people who think, that Ex**l is a tool for graphical analysis
> of measurement values. I believe, nobody has the _real_ definition for
> what is really scientific software. So IMHO it doesn't make sense to
> have a Mathematics section inside and outside Science/Education. Or do
> you know a definition to know the difference?
No I have no definition.
Excel is as you said a OO front-end. It is a simple spreadsheet tool
crafted by functions from lots of categories: math, graphics, ...
to do final calculations and report preparation in this front-end.
One can also program a chess program in TeX. It is slow, but works.
>
> > In general, my understanding of "Science" is in the sense of research
> > and not education.
>
> I do not agree. Education also means science. It doesn't just mean
> "teaching". For me, there is no difference between Science and
> Education. Where is the difference IYO?
>
Exactly this is the key:
Education: teaching
you are teached/trained to be able to do something
or to teach others
improve individual wisdom/skills.
Science: research
you apply the above to find something new.
improve the global pool of wisdom.
> > Thus an example breakdown within Sience could be like
> > Mathematics
> > Physics
> > Bio
> > Chemistry
> > Astronomics
> > Geology
> > ...
> > where some applications or tools can be part of several sub-sections.
> > Perhaps applications which could be used in nearly all sub-sections
> > could go into a "General" or "Common" Section.
> >
> > In parallel to section "Science" have a section "Education".
>
> And there also:
> Mathematics
> Physics
> Bio
> Chemistry
> Astronomics
> Geology
> ...
> ?
>
> Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
>
Yes, this looks strange, you are correct.
But think about these Section, Sub-section, ... names like tag
attributes. You are free to order the tree in any way you want.
Science
Math
Physics
Bio
...
Education
Math
Physics
Bio
is equal to
Science
Math
Education
Research
Physics
Education
Research
Bio
Education
Research
...
Kind Regards,
Thomas
Reply to: