Skip to content

[RsR] Package title (was: OGK covariance estimator)

6 messages · Jean-Christophe BOUETTE, Valentin Todorov, Martin Maechler +2 more

Original
Jean-Christophe BOUETTE
# 
What about:
robuSTats

the good thing with this name is that is contains the word "robust",
so everybody knows what it is about, and you will find the package
each time you search for "robust" on the R help archives...

just my two cents...

Jean-Christophe.
Valentin Todorov
# 
Why not simply 'robusta'

It is very easy also to find a logo for the package - robusta means:
- a coffee plant - Coffea canephora (robusta)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Detail_of_Coffea_canephora_branch_and_leaves.jpg

- a palm tree - Washingtonia robusta
- a cactus - Opuntia robusta

best
valentin
On 12/6/05, Jean-Christophe BOUETTE <jcbouette at gmail.com> wrote:
Martin Maechler
# 
Valentin> Why not simply 'robusta'
    Valentin> It is very easy also to find a logo for the package - robusta means:
    Valentin> - a coffee plant - Coffea canephora (robusta)
    Valentin> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Detail_of_Coffea_canephora_branch_and_leaves.jpg

    Valentin> - a palm tree - Washingtonia robusta
    Valentin> - a cactus - Opuntia robusta

cute!

Thank you, Valentin and Jean-Christophe!
I think both proposals are better than my original ones
{though I would not like to capitalize the 'ST' (in 'robuSTats')}.

As a Swiss, I should of course plan to organize a vote
now about the package *name* 
{ strictly speaking, the package "title" is something else: namely
  the text after 'Title:' in package DESCRIPTION file.  
  Currently, I have 'Title: Robust Statistics'
  there, but that's something that can easily be changed later;
  changing the package *name* however is much less desirable at
  some later time.
}
but instead of the vote, I'm waiting for more
comments/suggestions.
Where I'd personally slightly prefer 'robusta', I note that the
name could also be a drawback, when searching for it, e.g., by google.

Martin
Valentin> On 12/6/05, Jean-Christophe BOUETTE <jcbouette at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 10:07:07 +0100
    >> > From: Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch>
    >> > Subject: Re: [RsR] OGK covariance estimator
    >> > To: Peter Filzmoser <P.Filzmoser at tuwien.ac.at>
    >> > Cc: R-SIG-Robust at stat.math.ethz.ch
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >  o  Proposed names for the `basic robust statistics' package:
    >> >     1. robstats
    >> >     2. robbase
    >> >     3. baseRob
    >> >
    >> 
    >> What about:
    >> robuSTats
    >> 
    >> the good thing with this name is that is contains the word "robust",
    >> so everybody knows what it is about, and you will find the package
    >> each time you search for "robust" on the R help archives...
    >> 
    >> just my two cents...
    >> 
    >> Jean-Christophe.
    >> 
    >> 
    >> > Now I'm interested to hear more..
    >> > Martin
Werner Stahel
# 
Hello

Names are always nice to discuss. Let me add a simple proposal
for the name of the package:
robust
Since this should be the well maintained collection of robust
methods, I would go for the "generic" name.

Werner
Martin Maechler
# 
Wst> Hello Names are always nice to discuss. Let me add a
    Wst> simple proposal for the name of the package: robust
    Wst> Since this should be the well maintained collection of
    Wst> robust methods, I would go for the "generic" name.

(and Alfio Marazzi agreed with you).

There is one very good reason against 'robust':
Insightful's  library(robust) for S-plus.

Our package will certainly not be a clone, and probably quite
different in more than respect.  If we chose the same name,
that would lead to a *lot* of potential user confusion for those
who use both R and S-plus.
I'm sorry but I think that "robust" is really already taken in
the world of S ...

Martin
Peter Filzmoser
#
Martin Maechler wrote:
How about "robust-base"? I rather prefer longer abbreviations
than shorter if confusion can be avoided. The advantage is that
we can then also have packages "robust-mva", "robust-glm" etc.,
and it is easy to find all "robust" packages since they are
in alphabetical order.

Peter