Environmental scientist (biology/oceanography), data analyst, data manager, FOSS developer. Semi-retired.
Started programming in 1971 with FORTRAN and Basic. Started FOSS (then 'public domain') programming in the early 1980s. A trace of that work: http://www.kc85.info/index.php/magazines-mainmenu/morrow-owners-review-mainmenu-143/118-forever-z-scripts-a-loops-1.html. Now mostly working in Python; see packages 'mapdata' and 'execsql' on PyPI.
Moved from @rdnielsen.
@tarius
The skills section is the place you can list years of use of each tool or technology. The experience section is a place to list accomplishments, independently of what tools were used.
My recommendation is based on science consulting, where a pretty clear division can be made between tools and accomplishments.
@tarius
The same question would apply to skills mentioned in the experience section--unless the experience section is nothing but a description of use of those skills. It seems as if you and I may be valuing the experience section in different ways.
But the direct answer to your question is in an interview. If you assert both valuable skills and experience, then you will get pressed to demonstrate or explain those face-to-face.
I'm interested in both the candidate's skills and achievements. The list of skills is a quick and easy filter, but once past that, achievements deserve a lengthier explanation--and they may still reference skills.
Having hired for years in an IT-adjacent discipline, I like to see skills and achievements factored out, not unlike the way code or data structures should be factored.
A/B testing of resume structures might be interesting.
@tarius
I'm not familiar with them. All of our resumes are screened by actual people.
@tarius @devpaul
What you can do is more important that who you have done it for. I prefer to see skills, experience, employment history, and education in that order.