[Mageia-discuss] Mageia-discuss Digest, Vol 2, Issue 137

Sun Oct 31 16:15:48 CET 2010

Le 2010-10-31 10:51, Dale Huckeby a écrit :
+
+>
+> While we agree that "Young Family" doesn't work, it seems to me some of the
+> other categories are similarly broad. A useful rule of thumb would be to
+> focus not on types of persons or groups but on activities. Since "young
+> family" is not an activity, whereas "web development" is, that gives us an
+> objective reason for preferring the latter over the former as a useful
+> category. Likewise for "academia". Not all academics have the same needs,
+> for instance adminstrators versus research professors versus adjuncts who
+> teach and don't do research, yet all would fall under the term "academic".
+> In addition, a given college professor is not going to use his or her
+> computer only AS a professor, and his or her other activities, playing
+> poker online, playing games offline, buying and selling stocks and bonds,
+> etc. would vary widely from person to person.
+>
+> That's why I would focus more narrowly on what a person wants to DO with
+> his computer, in terms of *specific* tasks or activities. Early in the
+> process I would ask him what sorts of things he wants to use his computer
+> for and then list all the things he CAN do with it, each of which can be
+> selected or ignored. It MIGHT be useful to note, without it necessarily
+> being a selectable category, some of the things (and the apps that would
+> go with them) a typical high school teacher or rabid sports fan or
+> writer or stock market player might want to do or, alternatively, we
+> could indicate, along with the description of the uses of a particular
+> app or closely linked set of apps, what kinds of people might find
+> such app(s) useful, and why. All of this is a way of saying, which I
+> think we're in general agreement on, that we should be careful not
+> to cast too broad a net with our categories, that each should embody
+> a *particular* activity or *closely* linked set of activities.
+>
+> Dale Huckeby
+
+Here we agree again. There would be nothing to stop that section, for 
+example, "Academia" to open up to subsets of "Academia-Reasearch"; 
+"Academia-Administrator (office)"; "Academia-Teaching" etc.
+
+And yes, if they play poker online, they would then have checked the 
+"Gaming" category.
+
+The choosing of these categories are what the person wants to DO with 
+her/his computer. What you are suggesting is to ask her/him what they 
+would want to do and they would answer by categories. So why add such a 
+layer when we could already dispense with this layer and go straight to 
+the categories?
+
+There are only a certain amount of programmes available and therefore 
+the same for categories. We can offer the categories. If some of the 
+categories are broad, then, when picked, we could have for example, a 
+drop down extended menu from that categories with a sub-set of more 
+descriptive categories. And, remember, that software packages will 
+bridge the categories where they fit in more than one.
+
+We are saying the same thing but with different approaches.
+
+Marc
+
+