[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Axiom-developer] MathAction to email list connection

From: Ralf Hemmecke
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] MathAction to email list connection
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 10:51:05 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.4 (X11/20050908)

Page, Bill wrote:
Dear Axiom-developer Subscribers;

Gee that was stupid of me, wasn't it ... :(^

Perhaps this is a good time to suggest that we disconnect the
axiom-developer email list from the Axiom Wiki web site?

Good idea. I usually just remove those emails. A much better idea would be to post a FAQ every month. Or just a link to a FAQ at MathAction. Wouldn't that help people to get aware of MathAction and what one can do with it? Personally I cannot remember that I have ever changed anything on a MathAction page. The problem with too much text also applies here.

However, I don't think that it is actually the amount of text which is a problem, it is rather its organisation. I have already agreed that ALLPROSE is not (yet) good in providing such an approach, but it is not finished anyway.

What I would dream of is ONE main entry point into the AXIOM world. At the moment I could see several.
  1. Top-level Makefile
  4. The Axiom Book project
and maybe others.

If I look at (1), there is not reference to (2).

If I am on (2) I see a reference to (3), but being new to Axiom, I ask myself, why should I click on MathAction.

If I am on (3), I read...

  The purpose of MathAction is to support the development of the open
  source version of Axiom and to promote the use of computer algebra
  systems in general. It provides an over-the-web graphical interface
  for Axiom (see AxiomInterface) and Reduce (see ReduceWiki). Try out
  Axiom and Reduce online in the SandBox.

"Oh, I just wanted to know what Axiom is about, not develop it. I haven't even read what Axiom is. So MathAction is not for me, it's for Axiom developers. I don't need to read any further here."

If I am on (4). Is there a link to (2)? -- No.

Anyway, I would suggest to make (2) the main entry point and also reference it at least from the top-level Makefile and also from the book.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]