Category talk:Specification languages

Does this really fit in Category:Technical communication?—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 04:24, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Huh?

The contents of Specification language doesn't quite co-related with the contents of this category. Does it? I am not very well-informed on either of the two areas my confusion spans, so I would like someone else to chime in.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 05:04, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)

Categories backwards?

Is Formal Methods really a subcategory of specification langauges? Shouldn't this be the other way around, with specification languages a subcategory of the formal methods category? Swapping it for now, someone can change it back if there's a good reason that it should be this way that I lack the knowledge to see. Leland McInnes 06:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agree.—Ashley Y 08:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Not all spec languages are formal methods (UML being a prime example), and not all "formal methods" are particularly useful a spec languages (although that doesn't prevent some folks from trying). I think they're better off as separate but parallel categories. --Allan McInnes (talk) 05:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fine. The nesting seeemed odd to me. Separate categories is a much better option. Leland McInnes 17:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]