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

[Gabor Grothendieck]

On the Beginners section.   The first thing one wants to know is not
how to install R but what is R, what are its capabilities including
a sense of the variety of functionality available through the core and
CRAN, what platforms does it run on, how long will it take to learn,
so one can determine if one should even be using it.  Also I think many people
just want to see code immediately so there should be some code
there that people can look at.  I think its appropriate to set some
expectations here without being verbose such as:
R is massive; R involves programming; R takes time to learn.

Also many or maybe even most of the people who are looking at this
section are not
beginners in computing and IMHO it should not be called beginners.
They may very well be sophisticated experienced scientists,
programmers, etc. who just want to know what this is all about.
That is why it should be called something like Overall of R
or What is this all about but not beginners.

For those people who know Matlab
or Stata they will want to see the octave/R lexicon right away
and someone created a parallel R/Stata session that Stata users
would want to see right away.




On 2/2/06, Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendieck at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
> >
>