Re: Mathematica 7.0.1.0 and some General Comments
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg97262] Re: Mathematica 7.0.1.0 and some General Comments
- From: David Bailey <dave at removedbailey.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 01:07:39 -0500 (EST)
- References: <goqphr$lt2$1@smc.vnet.net>
David Park wrote: > One other requirement to make a breakthrough is the necessity of anyone to > be able to freely read an active and dynamic Mathematica notebook. It should > be something like the model of the free Acrobat reader. PlayerPro would do > the job but it is too expensive. I know there are problems here. I wouldn't > care if the reader couldn't print or save the notebook. Perhaps dynamic > InputFields could be limited in the total number of typed characters for the > notebook. Anyway, if it is so easy to hack PlayerPro in a usable way, why > don't some people just pay the $200 and do it? A free general Mathematica > reader would do more to smash the old technology and advertise the power of > Mathematica notebooks than anything else I can think of. > Just to concentrate on one of your issues - that of documentation, I am sure that the people at WRI who decided to move to paperless documentation used arguments such as: 1) We can redirect all the effort that went into a finished book into providing more and better information. 2) Virtual documentation is so much better because it can be updated so easily. In reality, what has happened is a retreat from quality documentation in the belief that whatever is wrong can always be fixed at the next pass. Thus for example, we find the following phrase in the help for Import: "Types of elements typically supported include:" What does the word "typically" mean? Presumably it means that the author could not be bothered to obtain a definitive list - even as of some particular version. To make matters worse, since the elements are specified as strings, there is absolutely no way to discover the elements that the author happened to forget (or, indeed the corresponding functionality!). The documentation of new or enhanced features is littered with phraseology of this sort. Compare, for example, the documentation of 'Import' with an old favourite like 'Map'. Furthermore, I don't think people learn a new package well by just invoking the help system. The help system is more suitable for people with at least some experience, who know what they want to look up. I learned Mathematica from the old book. People laughed at it because of its size, but it gave me a clear idea as to what was important, and what to read first - and of the overall scope of the software. As an example, I doubt if any newish Mathematica users think they need a clear understanding of the frontend/kernel architechture - so they never read about this, and suffer from a variety of misconceptions as a result. A book spoon-feeds the information in roughly the right order. David Bailey http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re: Mathematica 7.0.1.0 and some General Comments
- From: George Woodrow III <georgevw3@mac.com>
- Re: Re: Mathematica 7.0.1.0 and some General Comments