[R-wiki] [Fwd: The results of your email commands]
Frank E Harrell Jr
f.harrell at vanderbilt.edu
Fri Feb 3 15:33:58 CET 2006
Philippe Grosjean wrote:
> Frank E Harrell Jr wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>
>> I think that's enough, just think that Data Manipulation should be
>> promoted to a section.
>>
>> Frank
>
>
> One has to decide and keep consistent: the current top level (level 1)
> division of sections is between short docs (going to 'snippets' section)
> and long docs (going to 'tutorials' section). Then, we have:
> 1) in 'snippets': 'data-manip' among others.
> 2) in 'tutorial': no equivalent because longer document are likely to
> discuss various things... not just data manipulation. If, by chance,
> there is a longer document that discusses *only* data manipulation, it
> is possible to add a 'data-manip' subsection in 'tutorial' too.
>
> If we make 'data-manip' a top level section, we break the whole logic,
> and there is no reasons we shoudn't promote 'stats', or 'graphics' for
> instance as top-level sections... and at the end, we rework everything
> and end up with a totally different structure.
>
> Just think at the structure on harddisk in a more practical way. I like
> to separate short and long documents, because they are managed very
> differently. Long documents have a primary author that is more
> susceptible to update his own work, to append to it, etc... Many sort
> documents will be one shot (typically, someone converts an interesting
> R-Help thread, for instance). It is really more a collaboration of many
> people, it is much more chaotic. Consequently, it requires a larger
> number of subsections to keep a little bit of order. I think, for these
> reasons, that we have now a pretty good structure to help manage the Wiki.
>
> Now, it is possible to write tables of content that are more
> task-specific, that is, promote 'data', 'stats', 'graphics' as top
> level, and list all documents (both from 'tutorials' and 'snippets')
> under these sections. One could also think about such table of contents
> as area-specific (biology, finance, etc...). That is what is
> experimented here:
> http://www.sciviews.org/_rgui/wiki/doku.php?id=tutorials:tutorials
>
> Does this answers to your request (without breaking the current structure)?
Philippe, you have a better understanding of this than I do, so I'm
comfortable with your approach. I don't recommend area-specific main
classifications as their is much overlap between areas in the stat and
graphical methods used (and especially in data manipulation).
Frank
>
> Best,
>
> Philippe Grosjean
>
>
--
Frank E Harrell Jr Professor and Chair School of Medicine
Department of Biostatistics Vanderbilt University
More information about the R-sig-wiki
mailing list