-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 66
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Some extra categorization of examples and tutorials #246
Comments
cc @adele157, @aekiss, @julia-neme, @lidefi87, @PaulSpence |
Also I'd suggest moving Spatial_selection.ipynb to tutorials to reflect their intent as general teaching rather than example scientific analysis. Maybe also Regridding.ipynb and IcePlottingExample.ipynb. |
Good points |
If keywords do not work, then we can set a README with different categories, similar to this. We could even add a short description to each notebook. |
Should we do some of this reorganization as part of the Hackathon v3.0? I think we should. |
At this point I suggest instead of implementing keyword features and what not (which I don't know what to do) we just split the Documented Examples to two categories "Basic" and "Bit more elaborate" and we have a blurb above to explain that novice users are urged to go through the basic examples first. |
Not sure exactly where we should put this, but I thought we have somewhere an extra categorization for the examples so that new users have an idea where to start from. E.g., some of the examples there are quite involved (I personally can't follow them) while others are pretty straight forward. So I was thinking we have something like:
New users should first start from the Tutorials and in particular first with :
From the Documented examples these are a bit more simpler (and novice users are urged to look at them)
while the ones below are a bit more involved:
Please did the list I made.. I didn't pay too much thought on it... I may have misplaced an example!
There was a discussion during the hackathon about having the ability to add keywords (@aidanheerdegen, @angus-g, @micaeljtoliveira). If that can happen then we can just add a "simple" / "elaborate" keyword or something?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: