On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 4:02 AM, Dr. David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: > On 07/24/10 10:41 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 2:24 AM, David Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 24 July 2010 09:38, Robert Bradshaw<rober...@math.washington.edu> >>> wrote: > >>>> I like "Published" and "Shared" better. >>> >>> I think the issue I have with "published", which someone else in this >>> thread first mentioned months ago, is that in academic circles one >>> associates "published" with high quality. >>> >>> I can't think of any normal use of the word "published" to mean making >>> available a set of documents like this. >> >> I guess I'd say one publishes a web page, or blog, or photo album, >> etc. to share it with the world. > > But one normally does not aim to publish error messages on a web page. If I > get to a web page which shows a PHP error, it does not give one a good > impression. > > One does not normally publish out-of-focus photos, but selectively publishes > good ones. > > For one reason or another, people often publish error messages on Sage > documents. > > >>> Looking at http://www.sagenb.org/pub/ >> >> Right now I can't even get to that page :(. Clearly not what we want >> for a first impression :). > > Agreed. > >>> less than 10% of the worksheets have a rating. At that level, I don't >>> think its achieving much myself. >>> >>> Perhaps changing "Rate this" to "Please rate this" might increase the >>> percentage of people that rate worksheets. Clearly there is not much >>> interest in rating them now. >> >> Are we sorting by rating? If so, it doesn't matter if the bottom 90% >> that probably aren't even worth rating are at the bottom. The problem >> is that the random first-time-user's ugly code littered with >> tracebacks risks being the first thing anyone sees. > > Exactly. Though once you have a rating, if things get sorted by that, people > can easily make their items appear at the top. (I'm not sure if Sage lets > you rate your own documents, but even if it does not, you can easily set up > an account to do it).
There is little motivation for people to make "bad" worksheets, the kind we're talking about, sort to the top. Mostly it'll be pages people are proud of. I'm all for some kind of a superuser ranking ability as well--doesn't have to be 100% peer to peer. >> The demonstrations could be good pages as well, the question is who is >> going to create the content, and ensure that it doesn't go out of >> date? > > There are good examples around on the servers. It's just hit and miss > whether you find them. > > I don't think going out of date will be a major problem. If they could form > part of a doctest, then they would be tested that they at least work. It > would be good if a 'depreciate' warning could be raised if the code is > depreciated. > > In any case, if they were in the form > > http://www.sagenb.org/demonstations/number_theory/ > http://www.sagenb.org/demonstations/numerical_methods/ > > or something like that, someone with knowledge of those areas could have a > look occasionally and flag any problems - if a new largest prime has been > found, or Goldbach's conjecture proven, the page might need an update. > > I think aging is a relatively minor problem compared to the much larger > problem of finding a large bunch of error messages. > >> - Robert >> > > Dave > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org > -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
