Announcement of new packagebrowser?

[Enrico Zini]

On Sun, May 04, 2003 at 04:42:18PM +0200, Erich Schubert wrote:

> > However, if you come out with some objective definition of
> > "specialized", I'd be more than happy to see that tag in the regular
> > vocabulary.
> "specialized" is a "modifying" tag. It should be added when a package is
> more specialized than the others with the same tags. So you only apply
> it to one "C++ compiler" when comparing it with other "C++ compilers".

If it should be added referred to a given context, please give it that
context: use c++::specialized, for example.  Otherwise you risk to have
a tag which has different meaning depending on context: being
specialized for a c++ compiler might mean something different than being
specialized for a graphics program, and reading those "specialized" tags
out of context won't tell you anything useful.


> The problem is that people looking for applicaitons for their gnome
> desktop will morelikely miss the GTK apps - which would probably fit
> just perfectly into their GNOME desktop.
> I dislike this separation from a user point of view.

For tagging, I'd keep focused on the problem of describing the packages;
I'd worry with presentation issues in the moment they'll show up, if
they'll do at all.


> > What about an explicit ui::text or ui::term instead?
> We don't have negative selections in the UserInterface yet, and it makes
> the UserInterface more complicated to do so i fear.
> Well, hopefully the grouping will suffice.

The same I've written above seems to also apply here.


Read you soon,

Enrico

--
GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@debian.org>