From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1F3gUk-0000Ed-Im for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:23:31 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k0ULM8Jh030728; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:22:08 GMT Received: from biota.rsvs.ulaval.ca (biota.rsvs.ulaval.ca [132.203.160.2]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0ULM7rK008656 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 21:22:07 GMT Received: from ASSP-antispam (assp.rsvs.ulaval.ca [132.203.89.9]) by biota.rsvs.ulaval.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DFBFC0219A for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:22:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from 132.203.160.185 ([132.203.160.185] helo=dhcp-160-185.rsvs.ulaval.ca) by ASSP-antispam ; 30 Jan 06 21:22:58 -0000 From: Olivier Fisette Organization: Gentoo Linux To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] New category proposal - sci-vis Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 16:21:57 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <200511272053.49014.cryos@gentoo.org> <43DD3E86.9090206@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-science@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1398639.0L10y5gq5d"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200601301622.01106.ribosome@gentoo.org> X-Assp-Spam-Prob: 0.00000 X-Archives-Salt: 1f2e53b2-79e4-4d77-8362-2e559b61d38c X-Archives-Hash: 07f97a8c30618818f277922f25f53123 --nextPart1398639.0L10y5gq5d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday, 29 January 2006 09:29 pm, Markus Dittrich wrote: > I would tend to say yes, since molecular graphics programs can vizualize > everything from small molecules to large biomolecular systems. > Hence, I would have a hard time deciding if, e.g. VMD should > be sci-biology or sci-chemistry, whereas sci-visualization seems > natural. I would really like to hear opinions before I commit > VMD to portage. Personally, I would rather keep the specialised visualisation applications = in=20 their respective categories and use sci-visualisation for general-purpose=20 tools. Doing otherwise would create confusion, I think. For instance, shoul= d=20 TreeViewX be moved to sci-visualisation? After all, it is a visualisation=20 program for phylogenies produced by other tools, such as PHYLIP. However,=20 users are more likely to search for that tool in sci-biology. Does a genome= =20 browser belong in sci-visualisation? What about packages such as EMBOSS, th= at=20 propose a few visualisation programs, along with analysis tools? I think it is better to classify packages according to their field of=20 application, and keep visualisation packages that are not tied to a=20 particular field in sci-visualisation (ie. statu quo). Regards, =2D-=20 Olivier Fisette (ribosome) Gentoo Linux Developer Scientific applications, Developer relations --nextPart1398639.0L10y5gq5d Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.9.20 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBD3oN5r/GGfYtwOqoRAqpJAKCBMhHDbApOY7tXAdB0fACsQQXlWQCglBGz AXcRERyfQ4LHnOw2CTL11rk= =GUMi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1398639.0L10y5gq5d-- -- gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list