You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The draft tools listing at https://pyviz.org/tools is already very useful, providing lots of information about each project that helps users make sense of them:
What else can/should it show?
Institutional sponsor? (See Adding the tools dashboard #4). Seems useful for understanding how projects relate to each other, seeing which ones have financial support for multiple developers, which ones are focusing on specific agendas, etc.
Year of first release? Seems useful for understanding maturity levels and technologies
Date of latest release? Would need to be updated automatically to be useful
Underlying library (for high-level libraries)
Domain (for domain-specific libraries)
Technology? (Native GUI, JS, JSON, WebGL, OpenGL, SVG, PNG, D3) Would be very helpful, but hard to pin down objectively. Plus many libraries support many of the technologies, which could be hard to track. Maybe would need to make a draft listing and see if it's something everyone would agree on? Would take a bit of work.
Data size limits? Seems a bit slippery; depends on how much time people think is reasonable to wait. Some libraries have explicit limits, others vary depending on browser and compute capabilities. Hard to make this objective, even though it's measurable in principle.
My personal vote is to remove coverage to make room, then include sponsor, underlying library, and year info, and punt on the rest but consider adding them someday.
It would also be nice to be able to sort by each column (category, name, stars, contributors, year released, downloads, license), with the first view being categories as shown above, but the rest just being a table (e.g. sorted by year of first release or whatever the user selects).
The draft tools listing at https://pyviz.org/tools is already very useful, providing lots of information about each project that helps users make sense of them:
What else can/should it show?
My personal vote is to remove coverage to make room, then include sponsor, underlying library, and year info, and punt on the rest but consider adding them someday.