Here is a lot of software that does not fit the definition "Client" as given on the top of the page. They should be moved to a different category.Prof7bit 11:46, 25 June 2011 (GMT)

Done :-) Prof7bit

  • Except that this isn't the definition used in common-speak. To most people, a "frontend" (more often called a "user interface") is the client. The contents of this category should be split between Nodes (which implement at least the p2p protocol) and Wallets (which implement at least the wallet management). See Infrastructure for an overview. --Luke-jr 15:11, 25 June 2011 (GMT)
    • Since none of the other categories was linked from the software category and the client page existed already since January I asssumed it would be ok to follow the description of this client category ("downloads the block chain etc.."), leave it as it was and instead create the aditional category "frontend" (which can be an API binding or a complete User interface). My only intention was to remove a bit of the chaos, if the term "client" were not already used by this old category page i would have probably come up with a slightly different naming. Maybe it would be better to completely remove the ambiguous "client" (which could be understood as the p2p-client and by some people also as the user interface) and instead always strictly only use "node" "User Interface" and "API-Binding" and avoid the word "client" altogether.
    • regarding "Wallet" I am not sure whether this should be mixed into this client-server categorizing problem, it would create more confusion. (there is the user interacting with the wallet (wallet as an abstract concept) through the UI but there is also the node software (the bitcoin client <-- there it is again this word) using the keys in the physically existing wallet file to calculate the balance and to generate transactions) Prof7bit 23:01, 25 June 2011 (GMT)
      • After thinking about it a while I think we are (or I am) already over-complicating it. The original problem I had when I saw the software listing (and the reason I started to edit) was simply to distinguesh between real p2p bitcoin protocol implementations and mere user interfaces. Therefore we should throw away this complex construct of nested categories and sub categories and not split hairs about ambiguous names and instead simply make 3 categories: (a) p2p node implementations, (b) user interfaces and (c) API bindings and on each of these category pages explain in plain english what they mean and what they do. Prof7bit 23:16, 25 June 2011 (GMT)
        • The mess of the original client combining wallet and UI is a temporary problem. In the future, all UIs will be independently implemented from wallets (which they will transparently control for the average end user). --Luke-jr 05:24, 27 June 2011 (GMT)