Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer science
This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Computer science and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 months ![]() |
![]() | Computer science Project‑class | |||||||||||||
|
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used
Grammar/meaning question from "Adaptation (Computer Science)"
The text "the potential user groups are not known a prior, but need to be identified according to future scenarios" appears in the page Adaptation (computer science), under the first section ("The need for adaptation") as part of a bullet. Maybe I don't know enough about the English language to recognize it as something else, but "a prior" sounds to me like an attempt to write "a priori", as in A priori and a posteriori, which I'm not sure is meaningful outside of analytical philosophy. If that is the intended usage, the typo should be fixed, the a priori article should be linked, and the sentence should be reworded to capture what it means——possibly in a way that removes the phrase "a priori" altogether. Is it supposed to communicate that potential user groups aren't known at the beginning of the software engineering cycle? Even substituting "a priori" for "a prior", I'm at a loss.
--Beaker Bytes (talk) 15:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing out the problems. Your understanding is correct--in this context, a priori means at the start. I have rewritten the passage to clarify the prose. See if it helps. --
{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk}
18:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
New Page - Vienna Center for Logic and Algorithms
Hi! I am mapping Austrian computer science scene. I have created a new wikipedia article about Vienna Center for Logic and Algorithms, which was co-founded by Helmut Veith (1971-2019). The article is still in review, and it needs editors. Do you know someone who could review the article? Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrenus (talk • contribs) 14:50, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
GraphBLAS Article - Review and Improvements Requested
Hello WikiProject Computer Science! I'm one of the authors of the draft article on GraphBLAS. It's akin to the BLAS, but for graph algorithms and operations. It's been stuck in the review queue for a while, so I was wondering if I could recruit some help in 1) Improving the article and/or 2) Getting it approved and out of draft. Thank you so much for your help! --ScottKolo (talk) 21:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Lua
Hello everyone. Would anyone be interested in starting a WikiProject Lua? If so, sign your username at User:E Super Maker/WikiProject Lua Consensus.
E Super Maker (😲 shout) 01:11, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Proof of space hierarchy theorem
There seems to be an issue with the proof given in the article on Space hierarchy theorem. See the talk page of that article. Hermel (talk) 22:21, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
Response to "vague" in the definition early in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML_element
I agree with the label, FWIW.
Recommended: Add a clause at the end of the sentence so the end reads, "document or web page, typically an opening HTML tag (HTML Tags still applies), a closing HTML tag, and everything between."
This wording is consistent with my own experience and with these and other URLs: [1] [2] [3]
Recommended: Near the end of the article, after the text "|title=HTML Tags", and in the field "access-date", change "2009-03-28" to "2020-01-16" (or whatever later date you process this).
Several places in the article indicate this source remains useful. I agree. Further, it's comforting we can point to such foundational documents as having continuing value.