headers
Patrick Burns | 7 Aug 12:29

R jargon

The document 'Some hints for the R beginner'
is gradually becoming more complete and gradually
gaining momentum in terms of hits.

One of the more popular sub-pages is the jaRgon
page even though there is hardly anything on it.

I think the R-wiki is the place that such a list
should live.  My vision is that for each word
there be a brief definition and then a link to a
wiki page for the word.  A number of definitions
would be on the same page.

I think this could be the application that finally
gives the R-wiki the boost that it needs to fulfill
its promise.  The people learning R from the 'hints'
document would come to think of the R-wiki as a
natural place to look for information.

The steps to do this are to create the structure
within the wiki for it, and then to populate the
definitions.  The glossary from S Poetry should be
a good starting point.  I'm also happy to donate
the jaRgon pun.

--

-- 
Patrick Burns
patrick <at> burns-stat.com
http://www.burns-stat.com
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Ben Bolker | 8 Aug 22:27
Picon

Re: R jargon

  So ... are you asking requesting commentary on whether this is a
good idea or not? (Seems so to me.)  Asking for for help in porting
this/volunteers to port it? (I might help, but I also might not find
time. I would be happy if someone else volunteered ...)

  I guess I'm as frustrated as (perhaps) all of the other wiki contributors
that it hasn't taken off, and that the primary source of information as well
as the primary sink of energy for answering questions remains the mailing
list. (Now Stackoverflow, Stackexchange, and various R blogs are also
competing for this energy ...)
   I intended to make contributions to the wiki be a class activity, but I
never really got around to it. I still think that's a good idea.

  Ben Bolker

On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 6:29 AM, Patrick Burns <patrick <at> burns-stat.com> wrote:
> The document 'Some hints for the R beginner'
> is gradually becoming more complete and gradually
> gaining momentum in terms of hits.
>
> One of the more popular sub-pages is the jaRgon
> page even though there is hardly anything on it.
>
> I think the R-wiki is the place that such a list
> should live.  My vision is that for each word
> there be a brief definition and then a link to a
> wiki page for the word.  A number of definitions
> would be on the same page.
>
> I think this could be the application that finally
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Patrick Burns | 9 Aug 10:27
Picon

Re: R jargon

Thanks for the good question, Ben.

I'm looking for volunteers.  I'm
definitely not going to have time to
learn enough wiki stuff to put the
structure in place.

Once the structure is there, I would
put definitions in.  But I'd prefer
for someone to volunteer to do that
as well -- I have one or two other
things in mind to do.

Pat

On 08/08/2010 21:27, Ben Bolker wrote:
>    So ... are you asking requesting commentary on whether this is a
> good idea or not? (Seems so to me.)  Asking for for help in porting
> this/volunteers to port it? (I might help, but I also might not find
> time. I would be happy if someone else volunteered ...)
>
>    I guess I'm as frustrated as (perhaps) all of the other wiki contributors
> that it hasn't taken off, and that the primary source of information as well
> as the primary sink of energy for answering questions remains the mailing
> list. (Now Stackoverflow, Stackexchange, and various R blogs are also
> competing for this energy ...)
>     I intended to make contributions to the wiki be a class activity, but I
> never really got around to it. I still think that's a good idea.
>
>    Ben Bolker
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Philippe Grosjean | 16 Aug 12:52

Re: R jargon

One thing that can be done is to update the list of abbreviations to 
include R specific terms. The Wiki adds automatically a little tooltip 
text with the definition that is activated each time the user moves the 
mouse cursor on top of the word.

A page with the definitions would be worth too.

Regarding the mitigate success of the Wiki, that contrasts with other 
languages where the wiki is really the primary source of information (I 
think at Tcl/Tk, for instance). I think the reason is the other 
"channels" of information are pre-existing the R wiki, and people are 
used to them. Regarding R blogs, the reason is different: it looks more 
technically up-to-date to have and use a blog than a wiki... although I 
think the wiki is better for collaborative writing of documentation in a 
centralized place.

The "wikified" version of help pages with a discussion section was, I 
think, a good idea but I never got the time to finalize the plugin and 
to install a system that automatically synch wiki versions of help pages 
with latest version, ... as intended.

Now, the new HTTP help server introduced in R 2.10 opens new 
perspectives. If someone is connected to the Internet, it should be 
possible to add the discussion section of the corresponding wiki page at 
the bottom of the regular help page. Hence, every user that would add 
this feature (by means of a rwiki package that is still to be written) 
would get a very easy and convenient access to related wiki pages. Then, 
of course, people would have to populate the discussion sections with 
short tips, comments, or links to other related wiki pages, ... but the 
key feature here would be to bring the R wiki right inside (at the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Frank Harrell | 16 Aug 14:03
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: R jargon


You make good points Philippe.  I stand my my original opinion that 
as long as everyone continues to answer posts to r-help it will 
remain a never-ending unorganized string of largely redundant 
information.  It is rare for people seeking information to search the 
r-help archive, and the archive is unnecessarily large.

Frank

Frank E Harrell Jr   Professor and Chairman        School of Medicine
                      Department of Biostatistics   Vanderbilt University

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Philippe Grosjean wrote:

> One thing that can be done is to update the list of abbreviations to
> include R specific terms. The Wiki adds automatically a little tooltip
> text with the definition that is activated each time the user moves the
> mouse cursor on top of the word.
>
> A page with the definitions would be worth too.
>
> Regarding the mitigate success of the Wiki, that contrasts with other
> languages where the wiki is really the primary source of information (I
> think at Tcl/Tk, for instance). I think the reason is the other
> "channels" of information are pre-existing the R wiki, and people are
> used to them. Regarding R blogs, the reason is different: it looks more
> technically up-to-date to have and use a blog than a wiki... although I
> think the wiki is better for collaborative writing of documentation in a
> centralized place.
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane