On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Or should we just stick to wikipedia?  Is it doing a satisfactory job?

Also check out the Cryptography Reader:

"Matt Crypto" set up an "article (to clean up) of the day" replete with a bar graph of how "done" he thinks it is.

As to accuracy, there are several authors I respect who keep many of the crypto articles on their watchlists, so that we notice when people make changes.

I'm quite happy with a number of the pages in the reader, enough that I point my students to them and use the figures in my lecture slides. I like the intersecting planes in the "secret sharing" article particularly:

of work. I proposed a few weeks ago (in the meta-discussion) to do it, but was concerned that doing so would step on toes and seem invasive. No one has responded to that, not even the people who flagged the article as needing work.

An old wikipedia saying is "be bold in updating pages": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BBIUP


The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to