Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!rutgers!columbia!cunixc!shenkin
From: shenkin@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu (Peter S. Shenkin)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: popi, the digital darkroom
Message-ID: <2586@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 1 Jan 90 19:01:03 GMT
References: <1989Dec27.053537.14990@eng.umd.edu> <2567@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu> <1989Dec29.150055.15892@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <2875@optilink.UUCP>
Reply-To: shenkin@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu (Peter S. Shenkin)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Columbia University
Lines: 27

In article <2875@optilink.UUCP> brad@optilink.UUCP (Brad Yearwood) writes:
>
>The "popi" distribution includes a README file.  This makes explicit
>and clear reference to a published book upon whose code the distribution
>is based.

This is insufficient.  Do you expect people to go running to the library
to look up an obscure reference just to figure out what the program does?

The inclusion of such references is laudable, since it allows someone
who already knows he's interested to get more background, but the README --
or, better yet, a few prefatory sentences -- should tell us what the
program does.

>Where's the beef?

We shouldn't ask the authors to include the reference, but we should ask them to
give us a ten line description of what the program is about.  For example,
"A program to manipulate contrast levels of bit-mapped images," or whatever
it does;  I still don't know.  I ASSUME the program has something to do with 
image-processing, but I shouldn't have to go to the library to find out if 
this guess is correct.

	-P.
************************f*u*cn*rd*ths*u*cn*gt*a*gd*jb**************************
Peter S. Shenkin, Department of Chemistry, Barnard College, New York, NY  10027
(212)854-1418  shenkin@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu(Internet)  shenkin@cunixc(Bitnet)