MASON-INTEREST-L Archives

August 2011

MASON-INTEREST-L@LISTSERV.GMU.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
MASON Multiagent Simulation Toolkit <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Stuart Rossiter <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 23 Aug 2011 06:01:27 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Reply-To:
MASON Multiagent Simulation Toolkit <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Sean,

  The manual is looking great so far. Such high quality documentation is
such a rare thing in the open source world that I think we should all be
very appreciative. Comparing this (and the excellent
actually-explains-the-underlying-framework-code tutorials and Javadoc) with
the Repast Simphony ones is like comparing night and day IMO (though they
perhaps have slightly different target audiences and, to be fair to Repast,
it is labelled as beta at the moment). Having used MASON quite a bit, I
thought the existing documentation was good (esp. the level of detail in the
Javadocs), so this is just the icing on the cake.

With that sycophancy aside :-), a couple of points/questions:

i) Are the existing tutorials still to be retained and subject to the same
level of attention as the manual? I hope so (despite the tutorial in the
manual), and think they're nicely complementary. I presume all the example
models will stay as well (with any tweaks required to match the new codebase).

ii) Would you consider a short Introduction sub-section on the support and
previous/ongoing funding of MASON? It's always useful as a user to have a
feel for such aspects. I appreciate (as an academic) that academic funding
is precarious at the best of times, but I don't know, for example, what
types of agreements you have with GMU. If some/all of this is a little
sensitive/political, then fair enough not to include it.

iii) Just some typos I spotted whilst whizzing through (with section numbers):

1.3: This example caused --> This example causes
11: high-level than, say, OpenGL --> higher-level than, say, OpenGL

Stuart

ATOM RSS1 RSS2