[PL] 2004 Discussion: PROGRAMMING

  • Thread starter Thread starter Susan Bugher
  • Start date Start date
S

Susan Bugher

The Nominations page is here:

http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php

Nominated programs can be evaluated at this time. A valuable program may
been have been overlooked during the nomination period. Late nominations
and seconds are permitted during the discussion period if there is
support for the program.

This thread is for review and comments related to programs on the
PROGRAMMING page.

Programs that were nominated and seconded are listed below. The
subcategory is shown after the program name.

Frhed (1 Editor: Hex)
ConText (1 Editor: Programmer)
Crimson Editor (1 Editor: Programmer)
emacs (1 Editor: Programmer)
Jedit (1 Editor: Programmer)
Programmer's File Editor (PFE) (1 Editor: Programmer)
PSPad (1 Editor: Programmer)
SciTE (1 Editor: Programmer)
vim (1 Editor: Programmer)
Batchrun (2 Automation: Batch Files)
AutoIt (2 Automation: Macros)
Easy SFV Creator (3)
Free Pascal (3 Compiler)
Inno Setup (3 Installer)
Icon Snatcher (3 Resource Tool)
IconShop (3 Resource Tool)
Resource Hacker (3 Resource Tool)
TWEAK UI (3 System Tweaker)
TweakAll (3 System Tweaker)
Xteq X-Setup (3 System Tweaker)

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
 
In another thread, people were discussing how icon (resource) tools were a
questionable fit for PROGRAMMING, and I agree. I'd say the same thing
about System Tweakers. IMO the average person would look for them under
SYSTEM UTILITIES
 
jason said:
In another thread, people were discussing how icon (resource) tools were a
questionable fit for PROGRAMMING, and I agree. I'd say the same thing
about System Tweakers. IMO the average person would look for them under
SYSTEM UTILITIES
Click to expand...


I'd like comments on the *overall* organization of the PROGRAMMING and
SYSTEM UTILITY pages.

Some of the subcategories don't even *have* names.

Help would be appreciated.

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
 
Susan said:
I'd like comments on the *overall* organization of the PROGRAMMING and
SYSTEM UTILITY pages.
Click to expand...

How about some random observations? :)

When looking for a text editor, many people look at ALL types...including
programming editors...whatever best fills their need. So programming
editors need to be cross-referenced to TEXT.

I'm having a hard time figuring out where Batchrun belongs. Like AutoIt,
it's an automation tool, but it doesn't involve scripting or using a
programming language. I'm not sure where it goes...but I can't imagine
anyone looking for it under Programming...unless Programming is changed
to Programming and Automation.

And the two already mentioned:

Your average person is likely to look for system tweakers under System
Utilities, not Programming.

Your average person is likely to look for icon tools under Graphics, not
Programming.

So...one of the conflicts is between the "average" person and the
"scientist". While icons may *technically* be resources, people tend to
equate icons with graphics.

Another issue is you want to encourage serendipity. Referring to the
debate we had earlier, music fans are likely to zip over to Multimedia,
expecting to see *all* the MP3-related programs available. So they'd
likely miss MPEG Audio Collection if it's hidden away under Catalogers
without a cross-reference to Multimedia.

In general...regardless of the categories used, I think people will have
a tough time finding programs unless there is a lot of cross-referencing.
 
jason said:
How about some random observations? :)
Click to expand...
In general...regardless of the categories used, I think people will have
a tough time finding programs unless there is a lot of
Click to expand...
cross-referencing.

??? . . . unclear on the concept?

PL2003 is the first PL with a Category Index page. The Category Index
page *is* a *CROSS-REFERENCE*. It is important to have good
(descriptive) subcategory names. I need help with this.

There will be few cross-references on the program description pages.
They do not fit into the framework of those pages and are very time
consuming to do.

At this time the Category Index page is the primary cross-reference tool
for the PL. More elaborate cross-referencing might make a good
*separate* project should someone care to take it on.

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
 
Susan said:
There will be few cross-references on the program description pages.
They do not fit into the framework of those pages and are very time
consuming to do.
Click to expand...

Fair enough...then we're back to dealing with the individual
programs/subcats that fit more than one category and deciding which
category is best. That may be too big of a job for this year. If so, it
can be done later...and the results incorporated into next year's PW.

We're attempting to do a lot this year...so maybe deferring it does make
sense. At any rate...then or now...it seems worth discussing the
philosophical issues...do we cater to the "average" user, or the
"scientist"? And how much weight should we give to maximizing
serendipity for someone looking for ALL MP3 programs, say, rather than
having the programs spread in several categories...that kind of thing.

They're difficult issues...that's probably why no one is tackling them
head-on. It requires a top-level view of ALL the categories...and that's
a big task. I suppose you could consider the categorization "admin
perogative" ...that would get rid of the issue altogether. :-)
 
jason <[email protected]>:

Three suggestions coincided very much with takes I'd had when viewing
the global cats:

Icon editors more sought under graphics tools
Text editors supporting syntax highlighting ("programmers' editors")
more sought under text editors
Registry tweakers more sought sought under system tools
Fair enough...then we're back to dealing with the individual
programs/subcats that fit more than one category and deciding which
category is best. That may be too big of a job for this year. If so, it
can be done later...and the results incorporated into next year's PW.
Click to expand...

When I studied the global cats, I went through a process. First area,
concerning a portion of the placements, it started along the lines of,
wait, shouldn't this whole group be over under this cat (as in examples
above), and these items there fit best elsewhere; and why does this one
cat exist, and this one, can it not be subdivided....on into, well how
would everything together best arranged (btw, notice how complex the
questions can become when studying the organizers cat).

Next, something kicked in, either laziness in itself, or maybe a wise
laziness, one that knew such an organization project would take me months
to resolve to my satisfaction. Also, through the whole process, even while
having a different view personally on some groups of programs, my admiration
for Susan's accomplishment accelerated. Even if it was something she'd had
a long time to do, arrange everything all together, and even she hadn't
been in the process of dealing with a lot of other related information
tasks concurrently, it was a major feat. How fast and dynamically it's been
taken care of (together with the fact that the global structure has strong
undercurrents of logic), my main reaction was to be left well, like boggled
by a superpower energy.
We're attempting to do a lot this year...so maybe deferring it does make
sense. At any rate...then or now...it seems worth discussing the
philosophical issues...do we cater to the "average" user, or the
"scientist"? And how much weight should we give to maximizing
serendipity for someone looking for ALL MP3 programs, say, rather than
having the programs spread in several categories...that kind of thing.
Click to expand...

Your three suggestions above are examples of the way I saw it, too. Yet
there are other cases where possibly you and I might differ, or likely
someone else doesn't see it as the two of us do. I would much enjoy
threads about recategorizing; in ideal wishworld, I'd enjoy such threads
about recategorizing that take place later on, when PL is done, and this
group gets bored, to where it tends to start seeking its entertaiment in
mega-politics and things.

OTOH, say it were possible (?), to get enough vocalization advocating,
for instance, moving registry tweakers to another cat (plus even get rid
of the programming page altogether, and made some other subcat from the
system tools page, etc) -- yet that we didn't get that talk finished even
in the near future. Further timing issue: already the official call for
moving things across cats, it was a couple weeks ago, and I'd wondered if
maybe sort of expired/deadlined. So, soon (or already) we'd be up against
the disadvantages in moving things around, once they're in place, making
visits to the PL site a confusion.
They're difficult issues...that's probably why no one is tackling them
head-on. It requires a top-level view of ALL the categories...and that's
a big task. I suppose you could consider the categorization "admin
perogative" ...that would get rid of the issue altogether. :-)
Click to expand...

Yes, and I saw that Susan pointed out that the key navigational aid was
the category index page. I can see that. And whether there might be a
kind of supplementary navigational page, as well, no ideas. Actually,
the one idea I do kind of pick up going on here is that people are maybe
wanting on each cat's page, eg: "See Also: Programmer's Editors." It's
probably what would work the best, to reconcile the different ways to
categorize? At the bottom of each final page, to take care of the calls
for "cross-ref"?


--
Karen S.



(PS. Please excuse the sloppy run-on rambling of the thoughts and their
presentation. Main was merely wanting to try to gather further kL00s. )
 
Actually,
the one idea I do kind of pick up going on here is that people are maybe
wanting on each cat's page, eg: "See Also: Programmer's Editors." It's
probably what would work the best, to reconcile the different ways to
categorize? At the bottom of each final page, to take care of the calls
for "cross-ref"?
Click to expand...

Exactly...That's what I had in mind...though at the bottom of each
subcategory, rather than the bottom of each page.
 
jason said:
Exactly...That's what I had in mind...though at the bottom of each
subcategory, rather than the bottom of each page.
Click to expand...

Actually, I meant both...or either...whatever makes the most sense.

For example, at the bottom of the TEXT page might be a link to the
Programming Editors under PROGRAMMING and File Search under FILE
UTILITIES.

After the Editor-Icons subcategory in GRAPHICS, there might be a link to
the Resource Tools under PROGRAMMING.

After Audio-Tool in MULTIMEDIA, there might be a link to Cataloger-Media
under ORGANIZERS...YIKES!!! The Godfather needs to be moved (or linked)
to MULTIMEDIA as well...I had only noticed MPEG Audio Collection before.

Those are just a few examples.

I haven't thought through the logistics, but that's the main
concept...if we can't agree on where to put the programs in the first
place.
 
jason said:
Actually, I meant both...or either...whatever makes the most sense.

For example, at the bottom of the TEXT page might be a link to the
Programming Editors under PROGRAMMING and File Search under FILE
UTILITIES.

After the Editor-Icons subcategory in GRAPHICS, there might be a link to
the Resource Tools under PROGRAMMING.

After Audio-Tool in MULTIMEDIA, there might be a link to Cataloger-Media
under ORGANIZERS...YIKES!!! The Godfather needs to be moved (or linked)
to MULTIMEDIA as well...I had only noticed MPEG Audio Collection before.

Those are just a few examples.

I haven't thought through the logistics, but that's the main
concept...if we can't agree on where to put the programs in the first
place.
Click to expand...
go get 'em Boomer
 
34582.news.uni-berlin.de:

go get 'em Boomer
Click to expand...

Did I sent some kind of attachment? I noticed something appended to the
title of the post... Just in case, I cancelled the original and will repost.
 
jason said:
Exactly...That's what I had in mind...though at the bottom of each
subcategory, rather than the bottom of each page.
Click to expand...

Actually, I meant both...or either...whatever makes the most sense.

For example, at the bottom of the TEXT page might be a link to the
Programming Editors under PROGRAMMING and File Search under FILE
UTILITIES.

After the Editor-Icons subcategory in GRAPHICS, there might be a link to
the Resource Tools under PROGRAMMING.

After Audio-Tool in MULTIMEDIA, there might be a link to Cataloger-Media
under ORGANIZERS...YIKES!!! The Godfather needs to be moved (or linked)
to MULTIMEDIA as well...I had only noticed MPEG Audio Collection before.

Those are just a few examples.

I haven't thought through the logistics, but that's the main
concept...if we can't agree on where to put the programs in the first
place.

(This is a repeat of an earlier post...where something weird happened...)
 
jason said:
"olfart" <[email protected]>

<snipped>
Click to expand...

Thanks for snipping. "olfart" did a quoting of some 1000+ words to add
four:
Did I sent some kind of attachment? I noticed something appended to the
title of the post...
Click to expand...

Yep. I scratched my head a good one when I read it and tried to relate
it to the content of your post. :)
Just in case, I cancelled the original and will repost.
Click to expand...

It was new to me that the Berlin server let it through at this end for
receive. Some other servers though might drop the whole post, so I agree
that you ought to do a resend.
 
omega said:
It was new to me that the Berlin server let it through at this end for
receive. Some other servers though might drop the whole post, so I
agree that you ought to do a resend.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what happened. I'm still retracing my steps on this... It's
kind of scary I could send an attachnent without meaning to...It looks like
a binary was sent???
 
jason said:
I have no idea what happened. I'm still retracing my steps on this... It's
kind of scary I could send an attachnent without meaning to...It looks like
a binary was sent???
Click to expand...

Just a tiny text file, desktop.sfc

[Shell]
Command=2
IconFile=explorer.exe,3

[Taskbar]
Command=ToggleDesktop

Next time how about uploading your .pwl ?
 
omega said:
jason said:
I have no idea what happened. I'm still retracing my steps on
this... It's kind of scary I could send an attachnent without meaning
to...It looks like a binary was sent???
Click to expand...

Just a tiny text file, desktop.sfc

[Shell]
Command=2
IconFile=explorer.exe,3

[Taskbar]
Command=ToggleDesktop
Click to expand...

So I sent my desktop icon. :\ Go figure...
Next time how about uploading your .pwl ?
Click to expand...
Yeah right. ;)
 
jason said:
omega said:
jason said:
I have no idea what happened. I'm still retracing my steps on
this... It's kind of scary I could send an attachnent without
meaning to...It looks like a binary was sent???
Click to expand...

Just a tiny text file, desktop.sfc

[Shell]
Command=2
IconFile=explorer.exe,3

[Taskbar]
Command=ToggleDesktop
Click to expand...

So I sent my desktop icon. :\ Go figure...
Click to expand...

Yes. .scf (SHCmdFiles) are Explorer Command Files, just text files
really.
Besides Show Desktop, you may find also e.g. Explorer.scf.

I can only speculate, not knowing how Xnews works and whether that is
possible at all, that you inadvertantly dragged and dropped the icon
(maybe from your QuickLaunch bar) onto the composing window.
Yeah right. ;)
Click to expand...

I am going to watch your posts more carefully from now!
You never know what nice surprise you have in stock. *LOL*
 
jason said:
Actually, I meant both...or either...whatever makes the most sense.

For example, at the bottom of the TEXT page might be a link to the
Programming Editors under PROGRAMMING and File Search under FILE
UTILITIES.

After the Editor-Icons subcategory in GRAPHICS, there might be a link to
the Resource Tools under PROGRAMMING.

After Audio-Tool in MULTIMEDIA, there might be a link to Cataloger-Media
under ORGANIZERS...YIKES!!! The Godfather needs to be moved (or linked)
to MULTIMEDIA as well...I had only noticed MPEG Audio Collection before.

Those are just a few examples.

I haven't thought through the logistics, but that's the main
concept...if we can't agree on where to put the programs in the first
place.
Click to expand...

Speaking of logistics . . .

When you two get tired of thinking up work for me . . .

Perhaps you spare a little time to help? ;)

I hunted down a description for ID-Blaster - so I have all the
subcategories on the Security page named.

Before I make another 27 page set of revised pages I want to have all
the subcategories *properly* named.

In particular that means the PROGRAMMING and SYSTEM UTILITIES pages. I
know *some* suggestions were made but I need a review of *all* the
subcategories on those pages.

Some of the subcategories don't have names - I just noticed those two
programs aren't on the Programming page now (they are on the Nominations
page:

Easy SFV Creator
Python

I am slogging away on other things at the moment . . .

The lily is not ready to be gilded . . .

It *could* use a little nourishment . . . ;)

TIA

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
 
B.t.w.: I saved the file to my hd and clicked on it.
All it did was show me my very own desktop. Bugger!
That is not sharing!! *g*
 
Back
Top