16
\$\begingroup\$

After seeing few consumer electronics questions here today, I thought that it may be a good idea to change the link in the footer of SE pages to something which describes the site better.

I think (and I may be wrong) that some users just read "electronics" and assume consumer electronics without reading too much about the site itself. If that is the case, then changing text to something like "electrical engineering" or other suitable name which focuses on the engineering part may decrease the amount of off-topic questions.

An established example for a long phrase would be game development. The "development" phrase immediately makes it different from our gaming site.

footer

\$\endgroup\$
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ +5: Actually I never had a look at that footer before, but I think you're quite right. I would add the "engineering" to make it "electronics engineering". \$\endgroup\$ – stevenvh Jul 20 '12 at 13:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ For size reasons EE might work also \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 20 '12 at 15:21
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk 'EE' might be cryptic for many people. 'Electronics Design' is shorter.. \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 20 '12 at 15:41
  • \$\begingroup\$ @m.Alin There were trademarks issues with that name. \$\endgroup\$ – AndrejaKo Jul 20 '12 at 16:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ I was on vacation guys, @m.Alin's point was 100% valid and did not need further explanation! I am clearing the rest of the electronics design discussion. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 22 '12 at 4:39
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ You're all doing it wrong! You should upvote my answer, not my comment! :-) \$\endgroup\$ – stevenvh Jul 22 '12 at 20:25
5
\$\begingroup\$

The next build will update the footer to read "Electrical Engineering"

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Different from the site name :) \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Aug 2 '12 at 8:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Oops - my bad! This will be fixed soon. \$\endgroup\$ – Geoff Dalgas♦ Aug 2 '12 at 15:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ I thought it was pretty funny :) \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Aug 2 '12 at 15:33
5
\$\begingroup\$

"Electrical Engineering" should be the new name!

Side Note: Post other answers of other options so they can be voted on. Please down or upvote for how much you like this.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ So 'Electronics' or 'Electronic' is not an option? \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 22 '12 at 9:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ @M.Alin - Yes, but you have to upvote my answer for that :-) \$\endgroup\$ – stevenvh Jul 22 '12 at 9:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @stevenvh Ohh.. ok, if I have to.. [sigh] \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 22 '12 at 9:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ I had a brilliant name in one of the comments, but it disappeared ;-( \$\endgroup\$ – jippie Jul 30 '12 at 20:17
2
\$\begingroup\$

Like I said in comment I'd go for "Electronics Engineering". "Electrical" sounds too much like installation wiring to me.

edit
"Electronic" (without the "s") is fine with me. (not a native speaker)

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ This goes back to the fact we should be, "Electrical and Electronics Engineering." This is a pond thing, in the US electronics is not used really, in the EU electrical means power. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 22 '12 at 9:18
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk - That's why I would prefer Electronics over Electrical. \$\endgroup\$ – stevenvh Jul 22 '12 at 9:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk 'Electronics' it's not used in the US? That's strange. I've seen it used in a lot of sites. \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 22 '12 at 9:22
  • \$\begingroup\$ @m.Alin ohh the word is used, but electronics engineering is mostly not. There was a question on chiphacker about just that thing a while back and everyone determined it was not ever used by anyone(no European presence on site yet). I pick "Electrical Engineering" because it is what our site title says, I would really like it to say electrical and electronics engineering(same order as IEEE name). \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 22 '12 at 10:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk Strangely enough, I've never paid attention to the title of the site. Now that you mention it, it's wrong! it should be 'Electronics' instead of 'Electrical' :-) Being on the other side of the pond, I agree with Steven. 'Electrical' makes me think of installation wiring and high power stuff. (Disclaimer: I'm not a native English speaker!) \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 22 '12 at 10:37
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk Also, If you have an EE degree in the US, what does that stands for? Electrical Engineering? \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 22 '12 at 10:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @m.Alin it should be both, I can dredge up the meta request. It makes the most sense to say Electrical and Electronics Engineering to me as it copies IEEE, but I am always open to discussion. Yes, I have a degree in electrical engineering and I specialized in photonics and electromagnetic fields(not power). I have not downvoted this, but I really posted the answer I had to discuss the final name, I think we should revisit the other issue, i will bug community managers. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 22 '12 at 12:24
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Electronics engineering is wrong. If you're going to use that word, it should at least be electronic engineering (no S on the end of "electronic"). Here in the US we have "electrical engineering" (the opamp stuff) and "electric power engineering" (the generator and transmission line stuff). Long ago the opamp stuff was referred to as "electronic engineering", so I'm OK with that as long as you don't put a "S" on the end (that's just wrong). \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Jul 22 '12 at 12:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ Maybe we should take this to english.stackexchange.com :-) \$\endgroup\$ – m.Alin Jul 22 '12 at 12:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @OlinLathrop Ideally we would not exclude either community and do something like "electrical and electronic engineering." I will have to find a solid reference later, I cannot find the question it was discussed on right off hand. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 22 '12 at 13:32
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Olin - Doesn't "electronics engineering" mean "the engineering of electronics"? (I didn't mean "electronics" to be an adjective) \$\endgroup\$ – stevenvh Jul 22 '12 at 16:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ @stevenvh: I can see how that would make sense, but it's just not the common usage for whatever reason. You don't find schools listing majors that way, at least in the US. Here is one example, which also shows that "electrical engineering" has been broadened at bit by marketing: ecse.rpi.edu \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Jul 22 '12 at 20:21
-6
\$\begingroup\$

I think that stupid footer should be eliminated altogether. All it ever does is cause formatting problems with some browsers. If I want to go to other SE sites, I don't think of the footer anyway. Access to the whole list of sites should be available from a single click somewhere in the banner at the top of the page. That's where people are going to look for it anyway. Only the ones that notice the footer exist and then remember when they want to go elsewhere might use it, but nobody would think twice about it missing if they never saw it.

Down with the superfluous clutter!

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Footers are so 1990s. These days, with a layout like SE sites have, I expect an endless list of question that is loaded dynamically over AJAX. I never look at the bottom of the front page, because I do not expect there to BE a bottom. \$\endgroup\$ – drxzcl Jul 25 '12 at 12:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ @drxzcl: It sounds like you're actually agreeing with me then that the footer might as well be eliminated? Unfortunately some people still seem to want them judging from the downvotes this answer got. I really wonder how the footer helps anyone. \$\endgroup\$ – Olin Lathrop Jul 25 '12 at 13:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ In a roundabout way that's pretty much what I'm saying. Especially on the index pages, I'm fairly sure the footer has very little exposure. I'd be interested to see metrics on that if the SE people have them. I think the downvotes are not so much because of enamourment with the footer, but mostly because your suggestion is outside the scope of this question. It's not putting up the entire footer for discussion, just the EE stack's text label. \$\endgroup\$ – drxzcl Jul 25 '12 at 14:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Olin - What's the problem? If there would be anything useful below it, so that you had to scroll through it each time, then I would say you have a point. But like I said I was hardly aware of the footer, I simply don't scroll so low. It may be superfluous clutter, but it doesn't hinder me at all. \$\endgroup\$ – stevenvh Aug 2 '12 at 2:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .