Re: Debian menu and the Apps/Science section
On Sun, 2006-05-14 at 20:36, gnwiii@gmail.com wrote:
> On 5/14/06, Paul E Condon <pecondon@mesanetworks.net> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> The goal for Debian should be to make it easier for users to locate
> tools for their problems. There are many tools that are specific to
> a narrow subject area (e.g., DNA sequencing apps could be biology,
> medicine, forensic, agriculture, fisheries)
In my opinion, this would make Biology the toplevel below Science and
medicine, ... below.
Reason: the most abstract value is Biology.
medicine is done on a subsection of biological pieces
forensic is a more specific part of medicine, if I understand correct
agriculture in parallel to medicine as it covers another big part of
Bio.
Sometime happens that the same "word" applies to 2 different meanings:
1.) a global one
2.) a specific one, being a piece of the global one.
> and others (vector/matrix
> languages such as octave, Gnu Data Language, S+) that are used in
> many different fields. One way to implement this would be to support
> multiple established classification systems and and let authors/packagers
> choose the system(s) that feels right to them. The top level breakdown
> would be done by the classification scheme. Multiple schemes would
> be handled by having, e.g., AMS, GAMS, AMS+GAMS, ..., "3 or more".
>
Would this be covered by adding the same application into diffent
sections?
> I'm familiar with GAMS and the AMS 2000 schemes:
>
> <http://gams.nist.gov/Taxonomy.html>.
> The current GAMS scheme is viewed as part of a larger scheme
> encompassing all software, but I don't know if the larger scheme
> has ever been put to practice.
>
> American Math Society 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification
> <http://www.ams.org/msc/>
>
> http://xml.coverpages.org/classification.html lists many classification
> systems -- if someone feels they can't use GAMS or AMS, the might
> find something here.
Wouldn't this be better used as attribute tags to classify applications
than building a menue list?
Kind Regards,
Thomas
Reply to: