1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
5 |
|
6 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
7 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Markus Dittrich wrote: |
10 |
> | Depending on the "definition" of visualisation and hence sci-vis |
11 |
> | this category could also include |
12 |
> | |
13 |
> | sci-chemistry/pymol |
14 |
> | |
15 |
> | and possibly |
16 |
> | |
17 |
> | sci-chemistry/molden |
18 |
> | |
19 |
> | since both visualize molecules. Particularly pymol doesn't |
20 |
> | seem to really fit in sci-chemistry since it is geared toward |
21 |
> | biomolecules and could as well be in sci-biology. The same |
22 |
> | will hold for vmd once I am done with the ebuild. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Macromolecular graphics tools I really consider biochemistry, so they |
25 |
> can go either way. But I more often hear biochemistry elongated as |
26 |
> biological chemistry than chemical biology. So if forced to categorize |
27 |
> one or the other, I lean toward chemistry. |
28 |
> |
29 |
|
30 |
Hi Donnie, |
31 |
|
32 |
That sounds absolutely fine! Personally, I find it often |
33 |
difficult to assign life science related tools to specific |
34 |
categories. The boundaries between biology, chemistry, |
35 |
biochemistry, or physics in the life sciences have become |
36 |
fairly blury to me. |
37 |
|
38 |
My point was mainly to say that once a sci-visualisation |
39 |
category exists, users might expect to find tools like |
40 |
pymol, vmd, etc. in there as opposed to sci-chemistry or |
41 |
sci-biology. |
42 |
|
43 |
best, |
44 |
Markus |
45 |
|
46 |
- -- |
47 |
Markus Dittrich (markusle) |
48 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
49 |
Scientific applications |
50 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
51 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) |
52 |
|
53 |
iD8DBQFDipddxlRwCwb7k40RAhUrAJ4kAh9I/IEjfiHsOKCZ2kiiKDBM/gCeJGtB |
54 |
nV4IIJzvf5KplRk/A8qNhAw= |
55 |
=y/mj |
56 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
57 |
-- |
58 |
gentoo-science@g.o mailing list |