Hi Göran, Darius et al.
a) Feedback to Darius' categorisation proposal
Quoting goran.krampe@bluefish.se:
Hmmm.... Well, having a parallell categorization... is tricky.
Why exactly?
The best would probably be if we could allow me/Darius to make categorization changes to existing packages.
See my propsal below.
We could take care recording how it was before our changes so that we can easily revert stuff if the owners get annoyed.
The author should keep his right to choose the category s(he) like.
I think the only feedback really necessary is to know if people find this list useful. Even the text list (hand crafted by Darius) as such on the swiki is already useful and gives information which is not easily to get otherwise.
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2000
Technically I perceive it as relatively easy to implement a solution which gives the addtional comfort of having direct links to the individual SqueakMap entry.
b) Short outline: SqueakMap categorisation (Darius)
After you have opened the SqueakMap package loader there is a long pause during that the clone of the SqueakMap information in your image is updated. So the SqueakMap information is in every image (A question aside: what triggers the reloading of the SqueakMap info?)
SqueakMap default
works in every image which is using the SqueakMap loader.
The returned object gives access to the object net of SqueakMap information.
SqueakMap default objects
is a Dictionary of SMPackageRelease objects. These objects have a link to their SMPackage.
With these objects and the categorisation proposal http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/2000
(basically a string) it should be relatively easily possible to create another string with html-anchors which lead directly to the corresponding SMap-entry. One can directly paste this html anchor string into the swiki-page.
So Darius can work independantly. Others might follow and help him or come up with their own list of packages they find useful.
c) Categorisation policy
Regarding categorisation - I think the author should keep the right to choose any categorisation s(he) wants. It is like putting keywords on an abstract of a paper/book one writes.
But for people doing catalogues of software (librarians doing a kind of "bibliography") they have the right as well to categorize the items following their criteria. This may even include ways the authors originally didn't intend.
And in addition, there can be several lists/catalogues/bibliographies done by different people.
We are actually speaking of different 'views' of the SqueakMap object database here (database terminology).
d) SqueakMap server The SqueakMap server as such may or may not additional categorisation schemes. As I outlined above even a relatively simple separate tool/script could already generate 80% of the desired effect.
On the other hand it seems that nothing prevents us from changing the origianl SqueakMap categorisation scheme if we agree on a better one. This has the advantage that no additional programming is necessary. Only editing of data. But it could be difficult to obtain the agreement of the authors (in fact it should be a significant majority).
What do you think?
Hannes