ADR Suggestion Naming of the spectroscopy and imaging modules

[rozyczko]

Spectroscopy

View 1:

Naming it EasySpectroscopy would probably be a good idea.
Even if we only start with QENS, we can still envision/plan for adding more techniques: like spin or INS.
The naming is straightforward, avoids acronyms, and follows the Easy<Technique> pattern of EasyDiffraction and EasyReflectometry.

View 2:

The analysis of QENS data is very different from spin or INS.

With QENS, the model is a set of simple functions.
With spin spectroscopy the model is atomistic.
With INS the model is both atomistic structure and phonon spectrum.

The workflow of EasyApp would get rather muddled and complex if we wanted to allow all the possible models to be defined in a single app.

Also, QENS and INS are well-accepted and understood names of sub-techniques.

Imaging

Similar discussion needs to be started about imaging.
Here, we are going to provide analysis for Bragg Edge imaging only, which is based on the atomistic structure of the system.

However, this is not the only thing neutron imaging is used for. Programs like MuhRec do tomography reconstruction analysis - a task not suitable for EasyApp workflow (or is it?)

One could claim calling a module EasyImaging is therefore misleading, if the only analysis it can do is Bragg Edge fitting.

[damskii9992]

Would it be an idea to get inputs from the IDS's on this as well?

[damskii9992]

Also, regarding easyBragg, I think I would prefer a slightly more descriptive name, such as easyBraggfit (easyBraggFit?) or easyBraggimaging (easyBraggImaging?), to better specifiy what the software actually does.

[rozyczko]

Then maybe naming it EasyImaging makes sense? It will only be used for BE fitting so there will not be any feature creep (planned).

[rozyczko]

Agreed on: EasyImaging

Still in discussions:
EasyQENS
EasyQens

[damskii9992]

Just trying to wake this discussion up again, especially considering the work in #20, have there been made a choice regarding the name of the QENS package/repository yet @henrikjacobsenfys?

[henrikjacobsenfys]

It's called EasyDynamics at the moment, but as time passes, I'm more and more in favor of EasySpectroscopy. I'll bring it up again next time I talk to the spectroscopy people.

[rozyczko]

This should not be an ADR but just a discussion, I think.

[damskii9992]

I think it makes sense as an ADR, as the discussion is how we name our projects and could be relevant to future projects. Namely that we decided to use generic technique names rather than descriptive names, to avoid having overly long and complicated names and to allow increasing breadth of functionality in the future without renaming.