Open samuelgoto opened 6 years ago
I wrote down more concretely how we are judging quality here.
Hey @samuelgoto, I am trying for gsoc this year. Since I have no prior work with visualization to show and have less time to solve bugs. Can I send a proposal with design and a prototype mainly an implementation of a part of the prototype? Thanks 😃.
You want to follow this:
https://github.com/aimacode/aima-javascript/wiki/GSOC-2018
(apologies for the brevity, sent from phone)
On Mar 5, 2018 7:24 AM, "Madhurjya Pegu" notifications@github.com wrote:
Hey @samuelgoto https://github.com/samuelgoto, I am trying for gsoc this year. Since I have no prior work with visualization to show and have less time to solve bugs. Can I send a proposal with design and a prototype mainly an implementation of a part of the prototype? Thanks 😃.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/aimacode/aima-javascript/issues/152#issuecomment-370454118, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAqV6o3rlJDhwX1BWbfZBRj6p7PJaxCSks5tbVidgaJpZM4SOkHT .
The direction that I'm getting from Peter is that, given the choice, we'd rather see fewer (e.g. 1 or 2) but higher quality visualizations (e.g. it complements substantially the learning experience from reading the book alone or attending the class alone) than lots (e.g. 10+) of low quality visualizations (e.g. there is better material out there).
I think this is a reasonable trade-off because it (a) sets the precedent for the quality bar we and (b) enables people to use it right away, at the cost of coverage of the book.
I dunno if this is a hard criteria that can be applied blindly (e.g. perhaps there is only so much that one can do to explain a specific set of algorithms), but more of a general intuition (e.g. to the best of our knowledge, that's the current line of thinking).
@redblobgames, fyi