[Qgis-developer] Processing: module duplications

[G. Allegri]

Getting to the post subject, I feel it would be more natural to distinguish
between "generic" and "specific" tools. The experimental section could have
the same categories:

- Generic
- Specific (I'm not sure this is the right word...)
- Experimental
     - Generic
     - Specific

With specific I mean an algorithm of interest for a specific domain (e.g.
ecology, hydrology, economy, etc.).
In the future these algorithms could be organized under sub menus, so that
a sociologist would be routed straight to the tools of its interest...

giovanni
Il 23/giu/2014 19:18 "Victor Olaya" <volayaf at gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Paolo, that sounds good to me
>
> The basic and experimental modules that you propose are the current
> simplified and advanced modes. We should work on a normal mode.
>
> Let's discuss it here and maybe create a spreadsheet that we can edit to
> select the list of modules to include
>
> Thanks for the suggestions!
>
>
> 2014-06-23 19:06 GMT+02:00 G. Allegri <giohappy at gmail.com>:
>
>> I've given a look to the list of Processing QGIS geoalgorithms and I've
>> seen that all the tools from fTools seem to be there. I remembered that
>> someone was missing, but it seems not to be true anymore. I wonder if it
>> wouldn't be the case to drop fTools algorithms from Vector menu. It would
>> help in avoiding confusion, imho.
>>
>> giovanni
>>
>>
>> 2014-06-23 18:50 GMT+02:00 G. Allegri <giohappy at gmail.com>:
>>
>> Hi Paolo,
>>> I agree with you, a cleaner organization of Processing tools is
>>> advisable to reduce the confusion in users.
>>> It's rather difficult to teach them in a clear way too! :)
>>>
>>> IMHO this reorganization should consider also the integration of other
>>> sparse analysis/processing tools, like the ones under the Vector menu. I
>>> know it depends on their implemention (and its feasibility in the present
>>> Processing model), but it's one of the major sources of confusions or
>>> users. A typical question: why we have the Processing toolbox and a Vector
>>> menu, where some tools overlap, while other are only available under Vector
>>> menu, and so not usable inside a Processing model/workflow?
>>>
>>> I hope we will find time (=money) to close this gap and, hopefully, have
>>> most of the analysis tools under the same structure. Well... all but the
>>> C++ ones :(
>>>
>>> giovanni
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-06-23 18:42 GMT+02:00 Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>:
>>>
>>> Hi all.
>>>> We are thinking about the future of Processing framework. The
>>>> duplication shown among
>>>> modules is certainly a good thing, as it allows richer analyses and
>>>> more control and
>>>> verification, but can be intimidating even for skilled GIS users.
>>>> We have been discussed this before, but I came up with the conclusion
>>>> that a
>>>> reasonable approach would be to have three levels:
>>>> * basic - only one choice, no overly complex modules
>>>> * normal - all well tested modules, minimizing duplication
>>>> * experimental - out in the wild, all modules.
>>>> This would improve the user experience, and would require less
>>>> maintenance by core devs.
>>>> Of course the selection of the modules for the second category is
>>>> rather complex, and
>>>> would require much thinking.
>>>> Opinions?
>>>> All the best.
>>>> --
>>>> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
>>>> Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>>>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Giovanni Allegri
>>> http://about.me/giovanniallegri
>>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/_giohappy_
>>> blog: http://blog.spaziogis.it
>>> GEO+ geomatica in Italia http://bit.ly/GEOplus
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Giovanni Allegri
>> http://about.me/giovanniallegri
>> Twitter: https://twitter.com/_giohappy_
>> blog: http://blog.spaziogis.it
>> GEO+ geomatica in Italia http://bit.ly/GEOplus
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20140623/88c298b8/attachment.html>