2021-01-08: Absolute error - Definition discussion

[r-scotti]

In my appreciation, the term 'absolute error' is better defined in this Wolfram page than here
(is this the way you suggested @baileythegreen ?)

[r-scotti]

after 2020-01-08 mail from Bailey Harrington

[baileythegreen]

@r-scotti Yes, this is basically it. Would you like to submit a Pull Request suggesting an improved version? The use of existing definitions (like the Wolfram one) has been discussed in Issue #166, so you could either submit their version, or one based on that. Either way, myself and possibly the other English editor will look over it and check the definition and formatting.

[r-scotti]

Hello @baileythegreen I am not at all familiar with this way of collaborating, yet I would like to understand better how it works.
Using R I cloned the repo (should I have 'forked' it?). Then I opened a new branch (that could be done only locally, of course! is this step at all useful?)
Checking up "- slug: absolute_error" I realized that the English definition contents are shared by all the languages I could read.
It is evidently not a question of language, rather a question of concept definition.
Wolframs definition includes taking the absolute value as an option while current definition here presents the operation as a fixed characteristic.
In my perception absolute error is opposed to relative error, the latter being the pure number given by the ratio between absolute error and the value in question. Taking the absolute value of the difference is not necessarily a useful option.
Do you still suggest I edit the "en:" slot of the slug, 'commit', 'push' and proceed to a 'pull request'?
Many thanks, Roberto Scotti

[baileythegreen]

@r-scotti So, the reason the other languages' definitions have the same sense as the English one is because (not always, but most often) entries in Glosario are defined in English first, and then translated into other languages. So, yes, I would still advise you to edit the English definition and commit, push, and submit a PR for that. You could also flag that the other definitions should be altered (for instance, in an issue), and people who are capable of doing so in those languages could be assigned to it, or could pick out those issues to work on.

As far as the cloning vs forking, I don't think there's a 'right' way to do it. It may just be the difference between whether there is a version of the repository in your GitHub account. I can't currently remember if cloning a repo you don't own, then pushing changes to it might somehow create a forked version in your account. At any rate, you don't have access to the main branch here, so if it goes directly to this repo, it will create a new, temporary branch.

[r-scotti]

Thank you for the clarification.

…

On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 at 20:05, Bailey Harrington ***@***.***> wrote: @r-scotti <https://github.com/r-scotti> So, the reason the other languages' definitions have the same sense as the English one is because (not always, but most often) entries in Glosario are defined in English first, and then translated into other languages. So, yes, I would still advise you to edit the English definition and commit, push, and submit a PR for that. You could also flag that the other definitions should be altered (for instance, in an issue), and people who are capable of doing so in those languages could be assigned to it, or could pick out those issues to work on. As far as the cloning vs forking, I don't think there's a 'right' way to do it. It may just be the difference between whether there is a version of the repository in your GitHub account. I can't currently remember if cloning a repo you don't own, then pushing changes to it might somehow create a forked version in your account. At any rate, you don't have access to the main branch here, so if it goes directly to this repo, it will create a new, temporary branch. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#267 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEAKXDYYPZR73YNRNF4MA53S7QHQ7ANCNFSM4V3BPMWQ> .

-- Roberto Scotti <https://scholar.google.it/citations?hl=en&user=EgZYcIAAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate> - Nuoro Forestry School <https://www.facebook.com/NuoroForestrySchoolUniSS/> Dip. Agraria <https://www.uniss.it/ugov/person/2496> - scotti@uniss.it ORCID iD <https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7394-4473> Publons <https://publons.com/researcher/1104101/roberto-scotti/> IRIS <https://iris.uniss.it/cris/rp/rp02644>

--

-- *Dona il  5x1000* all'Università degli Studi di Sassaricodice fiscale: 00196350904