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 their respective categories and use sci-visualisation for general-purpose tools. Doing otherwise would create confusion, I think. For instance, should TreeViewX be moved to sci-visualisation? After all, it is a visualisation program for phylogenies produced by other tools, such as PHYLIP. However, users are more likely to search for that tool in sci-biology. Does a genome browser belong in sci-visualisation? What about packages such as EMBOSS, that propose a few visualisation programs, along with analysis tools? I think it is better to classify packages according to their field of application, and keep visualisation packages that are not tied to a particular field in sci-visualisation (ie. statu quo). Regards, -- Olivier Fisette (ribosome) Gentoo Linux Developer Scientific applications, Developer relations
pgpaHNDKNEnli.pgp
Description: PGP signature
