[R-wiki] R Wiki structure - level 1 & start page

[Gabor Grothendieck]

On 2/2/06, Ben Bolker <bolker at zoo.ufl.edu> wrote:
> Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
> > On 2/2/06, Philippe Grosjean <phgrosjean at sciviews.org> wrote:
> >
> >>OK, let's proceed step-by-step.
> >>
> >>Do we agree with the top level structure of the wiki:
> >>
> >>- beginners: collects together material for first time R users (and for
> >>curious people wanting to discover what R is). Subsections must still be
> >>defined.
> >
> >
> > This seems to be the same as tutorials which is a later subsection.
> > I would delete this one.
>
>   the argument is that "beginners" is "beginners-beginners" -- as in,
> "what do I do with this blank page in front of me?  I don't see
> a button for an ANOVA ..."  just enough to answer some of the
> questions of someone who is just beginning to think about
> using R.  You're right that some of it overlaps.  I think
> the main idea is to segregate some of the very basic stuff so
> that beginners have an easier time sifting through while they're
> getting started.

Then perhaps

Overview of R (sample session, capabilities, platforms, where to get info)


>
> >
> >
> >>- snippets: this is a huge section to contain various short pages. We
> >>have currently:
> >
> >
> > This only describes the first two sections.  Assuming that those
> > two are merged I would call it Code or Programming and then move FAQ up a
> > level since it doesn't go under code.
> >
> >
> >>  + tips: tips & tricks about R (please, do not comment yet on
> >>subsections there). The template for this is Paul Johnson's Rtips +
> >>James Wettenhall R Tcltk examples. It will also contain wikified
> >>versions of interesting threads on R-Help
> >>  + cookbook/examples: (I wonded if we really need to make two
> >>different sections here). Pages explaining from beginning to end how to
> >>make a given analysis in R, examples in focused on practical application
> >>of the method, cookbook is more "theoretical".
> >
> >
> > I agree that we don't need both.
>
>   Really hard to decide on the right number of sections.  I thought
> overall that fewer sections would be better than more sections (so that
> material relating to the same topics was spread over fewer different
> sections; I agree that cross-referencing helps a lot, but it's good
> to be able to browse too).  My proposal was basically for two sections:
>
>    "tutorials" was for longer, more coherent pages (analyses start to
> finish, task-specific introductions, etc.). This might include "cookbook".
>   "snippets" was for shorter bits of information.  I would roll "tips"
> into "snippets".
> >
> >
> >>  + faq: shouldn't it compete with the existing FAQ files on CRAN? The
> >>advantage of the wiki version is that other people can easy add FAQs,...
> >>but is it really an advantage?
>    how much of "FAQ" really belongs in "snippets"?
>
> > The original, miscellaneous, is better.  I find varia confusing. Would
> > prefer if the best name used independently of alphabetical order.
> > Appropriate order should be handled as a separate issue.
>
>  hear, hear
>
> >
> >>There is also a rather sober proposal for the 'start' page. Please, keep
> >>in mind that the 'index' at left will be replaced with a sidebar
> >>proposing direct links to various places of interest (a little bit like
> >>the left part of http://wiki.tcl.tk/). Would you like to propose an
> >>alternate 'start' page, feel free to do so by creating 'start2',
> >>'start3', etc...
> >>
>
>   my only thought here is to suggest expanding the descriptions enough
> (while still having the whole thing fit on one page without a scrollbar)
> to have a little better idea, e.g., that you would look under
> "tutorials" for task-specific introductions -- would it be possible
> to display second-level headings on the first page by default?
>
>    cheers
>     Ben
>