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).
Olivier Fisette (ribosome)
Gentoo Linux Developer
Scientific applications, Developer relations