definitions

[Ann Hale]

Why not use wikipedia for this function and let the definitions "grow"
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Adam Blatner" <adam at blatner.com>
To: <list at grouptalkweb.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 8:57 PM
Subject: definitions


> Dear Colleagues,
>          One need I think is growing is that of a clear, agreed-upon 
> glossary in our
> field. As yet, there is none, and many of the lesser-known terms may never 
> be presented or
> taught by the majority of trainers. They are idiosyncratic to the 
> teachings of only a few.
>      I have asked folks to help with this in the past, because what is 
> needed is some
> degree of consensus. I cannot pretend to be "the" spokesman-authority.
>   Perhaps if some minimal number  --at least four and perhaps a few more--  
> of recognized
> trainers could agree on a definition, and this could then be posted, it 
> might begin to be
> a bit official.
>        Definitions have been an important element in the 
> professionalization and
> scientific status of any group, whether it be electronics or mathematics.
>       Your comments and thoughts will be welcome. Warmly, Adam Blatner
>
>
> Grouptalk mailing list
> List at grouptalkweb.org
> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/721 - Release Date: 3/13/2007
>
>