Category talk:Complex data visualization - Revision history

Leeor at 01:20, 6 February 2017

2017-02-06T01:20:24Z

Leeor at 01:19, 6 February 2017

2017-02-06T01:19:47Z

Aaronantrim: response RE: subcategorization

2017-02-05T21:19:57Z

response RE: subcategorization

Leeor at 03:47, 5 February 2017

2017-02-05T03:47:48Z

Aaronantrim: don't put under GTFS category

2017-02-04T05:49:39Z

don't put under GTFS category

New page

I don't think that this should be categorized under [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] --[[User:Aaronantrim|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim|talk]]) 22:49, 3 February 2017 (MST)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 :What guidelines should we establish for when something qualifies as a subcategory of [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] and when it is too separate to qualify? -- [[User:Leeor|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor|talk]]) 20:47, 4 February 2017 (MST)
 :Articles can be filed under multiple categories. My thinking is that some/many data visualization applications might well not be GTFS-consuming. --[[User:Aaronantrim|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim|talk]]) 14:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)
-::True, I think I'm trying to way that against the possibility that most data visualization applications that will be useful for transit will have some way of using GTFS, although that may not be true. I'm probably probably getting too hung up though. I'll remove Data visualization as a sub category, and as I work on other categories movie forward I'll just try to see if they make sense as a sub category or not. -- [[User:Leeor|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor|talk]]) 18:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)
+::True, I think I'm trying to weigh that against the possibility that most data visualization applications that will be useful for transit will have some way of using GTFS, although that may not be true. I'm probably getting too hung up though. I'll remove Data visualization as a sub category, and as I work on other categories movie forward I'll just try to see if they make sense as a sub category or not. -- [[User:Leeor|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor|talk]]) 18:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:19, 6 February 2017
Line 3:		Line 3:
	:What guidelines should we establish for when something qualifies as a subcategory of [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] and when it is too separate to qualify? -- [[User:Leeor\|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor\|talk]]) 20:47, 4 February 2017 (MST)		:What guidelines should we establish for when something qualifies as a subcategory of [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] and when it is too separate to qualify? -- [[User:Leeor\|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor\|talk]]) 20:47, 4 February 2017 (MST)
	:Articles can be filed under multiple categories. My thinking is that some/many data visualization applications might well not be GTFS-consuming. --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 14:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)		:Articles can be filed under multiple categories. My thinking is that some/many data visualization applications might well not be GTFS-consuming. --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 14:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)
		+	::True, I think I'm trying to way that against the possibility that most data visualization applications that will be useful for transit will have some way of using GTFS, although that may not be true. I'm probably probably getting too hung up though. I'll remove Data visualization as a sub category, and as I work on other categories movie forward I'll just try to see if they make sense as a sub category or not. -- [[User:Leeor\|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor\|talk]]) 18:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 5 February 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	===Sub-categorization===
	I don't think that this should be categorized under [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 22:49, 3 February 2017 (MST)		I don't think that this should be categorized under [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 22:49, 3 February 2017 (MST)
	:What guidelines should we establish for when something qualifies as a subcategory of [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] and when it is too separate to qualify? -- [[User:Leeor\|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor\|talk]]) 20:47, 4 February 2017 (MST)		:What guidelines should we establish for when something qualifies as a subcategory of [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] and when it is too separate to qualify? -- [[User:Leeor\|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor\|talk]]) 20:47, 4 February 2017 (MST)
		+	:Articles can be filed under multiple categories. My thinking is that some/many data visualization applications might well not be GTFS-consuming. --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 14:19, 5 February 2017 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:47, 5 February 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I don't think that this should be categorized under [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 22:49, 3 February 2017 (MST)		I don't think that this should be categorized under [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] --[[User:Aaronantrim\|Aaronantrim]] ([[User talk:Aaronantrim\|talk]]) 22:49, 3 February 2017 (MST)
		+	:What guidelines should we establish for when something qualifies as a subcategory of [[:Category:GTFS-consuming applications]] and when it is too separate to qualify? -- [[User:Leeor\|Leeor]] ([[User talk:Leeor\|talk]]) 20:47, 4 February 2017 (MST)