Re: Debian menu and the Apps/Science section
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 06:35:33PM +0200, Peter Staudt-Fischbach wrote:
> Hello,
> Thomas Walter wrote:
> >Hello,
> >
> >On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 17:01, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >
> >>[discussion (in bug #361418) on the future of the Debian
> >>menu structure]
> ...
>
> >It also opens a long discussion about the hirarchy....
> >
> I think that's the main point. The more or less "networked" character
> of science allows for many different hierarchy models to build menus,
> depending on the viewpoint.
> >So having a Math section in parallel to Science could be for more
> >"calulator" oriented SW.
> >
> >In general, my understanding of "Science" is in the sense of research
> >and not education.
> >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"
> I'd vote for this too. But basically it looks as if we needed a next
> generation parametrized menu builder ;-) Is somebody working on that?
>
I suggest that the heirarchy be patterned after the organizational
structure of the faculty of a major university. There is, I believe, a
lot of agreement on this structure. Some may object that certain
departments at their university don't really do Science with a capital
's'. But few would hold that these non-Science departments do not
actually exist. So, the structure provides a convenient place to put
any software associated with any activity whose practitioners aspire
to being 'scientists'. Any other structure, opens Debian to becoming
a battleground for an academic war. Because I am somewhat parochial
American, I suggest some sort of union of the tree structures of the
several Ivy League schools.
Alternatively, look at the faculty structures of the top dozen schools
in the world in terms of the number of Nobel Prize winners on the
faculty. But this alternative suffers from there being good scientific
activities for which there is no Nobel Prize.
--
Paul E Condon
pecondon@mesanetworks.net
Reply to: