[Cuis-dev] Wikipedia Draft

[Ezequiel Birman]

On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 at 13:12, ken.dickey--- via Cuis-dev <
cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:

> On 2024-02-06 04:09, H. Fernandes via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> > IMHO, your rewrite miss the needed neutral tone for a wikipedia
> > article. It may be rejected again. Btw, you completely discarded what I
> > wrote, trying my best to be neutral.
>
> Different viewpoint.  In your text, I saw no study or article supporting
> or quantifying "understandable by human".  I was worried that this
> statement is not neutral.
>
> The expression “understandable by humans” sounds strange in this context,
it could even be interpreted as condescending: Are other programming
systems understandable by aliens? Maybe you meant comprehensible by a
single human? Like in “personal mastery,” Ingalls (1981).


> The draft text tries to do this by "Cuis aspiration" with TheCuisBook
> referencing the aspiration.
>

Some of my criticisms are *very* nuanced, I challenge the use of words like
“aspiration” and ”enshrined” in their current context, but I'd have a hard
time if you asked me to argue about it. It just sounds strange but I am not
a native speaker.


>
> I like the "Reduction of complexity" sentence, but without comparison
> how would one demonstrate this?
>

The mention of simplicity as a goal is ok but I wouldn't explain why
complexity is wrong like in Hilaire's proposal. First, we cannot
underestimate our readers. Second, in Hiliaire's text, that is an
introductory paragraph. I'd suggest we just enumerate our principles first,
and later we can expand if needed and pertinent to Cuis.


> By base image Class count, Squeak is 4x larger than Cuis and Pharo is
> 3.5x larger than Squeak.
>
> Without numbers it would be like saying some engine company makes
> smaller engines, rather than specifying range of weight or horse power.
>
> I see that people are worried about this comparison.  You are the third
> person to point this out.
>
> Please suggest alternate text.  We can ask a reviewer when we submit,
> but good to make things best we can first.
>
> > The article should focus on what Cuis can offer and also make it
> > special, with detailled description. There is no much need to write
> > about the other Smalltalk and compare with other Smalltalk, this turns
> > the article as a marketing/evengelist writing. We can have this type of
> > content, but not in Wikipedia
>
> My blind spot.  I see several articles describing Smalltalks and want to
> ask "what is different?".  Perhaps the wrong question to address in this
> context.
>

I am confident that we can answer what is different about Cuis without a
direct comparison to other distributions; yet I don't feel it would be
wrong to state some facts like class count. The problem I foresee is that
someone will have to maintain those tables updated.


>
> I will also try alternate text to be better.
>
> Thanks for the insight,
> -KenD
>
> --
> Cuis-dev mailing list
> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20240206/f19bea8c/attachment.htm>