Re: [Gretl-devel] A small, pedantic gripe about "models" in gretl: an analogy

On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote: > On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Riccardo (Jack) Lucchetti wrote: > >> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Hélio Guilherme wrote: >> >>> Since it is one of the most active/important/used menu item in gretl, it >>> is >>> important its name. >>> >>> Would "Modelization" be a good single name? >>> >>> Other options: >>> Model Specification and Estimation >>> >>> (I think it is OK to have a long name, because gretl is not prepared for >>> small screens like mobile phones) >> >> IMO "Model" is just fine. Like Allin said, it's shorthand. With the same >> logic, the "File" menu should be renamed, too. >> >> And besides, many sub-entries are organised exactly *by model* (eg the Time >> Series submenu -- ARIMA, VAR, etc). > > That said, I would find it acceptable to rename it to "Estimate". But is it > worth it? You beat me to it! I was just going to suggest that "Estimate" is about the only acceptable alternative to "Model" that I can think of. But I think/guess that "Model" is more likely to call up correct expectations of what's to be found in that menu, for most users. Allin _______________________________________________ Gretl-devel mailing list Gretl-devel(a)lists.wfu.edu http://lists.wfu.edu/mailman/listinfo/gretl-devel