Tag cloud is available for Wordpress (that UKB uses) as a plugin. Many of them: http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/search.php?q=tag+cloud
Best regards, Tomasz Janeczko amibroker.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Dennis Brown To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, September 01, 2008 2:10 AM Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: AmiBroker AFL Glossary project Dingo, Ok, I got the concept, but as you pointed out I have no idea how to deploy it in our case. Also, it appears that it is usually coupled with a hierarchal organization, so that would be the categories part of the data. From a top down point of view, a tool that was designed to display this organization would be neat, but from the bottoms up point of view, we still need the same data. I am at a loss for how to bridge between the two in a practical way for this project (which is after all a very small data set). This would probably be a piece of cake to write a jScript that could display what we want but I don't even know how to deploy that in the UKB context. I am out of my element when it comes to web pages. However, I am all ears. On the other hand, I know how to put things into a spreadsheet, sort, show or hide columns, and format output. I could even write an AFL routine that that would read in the raw data text, do all the searching and sorting and output a formatted result. Now wouldn't that be a kick in the pants --LOL ;) Not sure I could handle links though. BR, Dennis On Aug 31, 2008, at 5:48 PM, dingo wrote: Yes, its a more "modern" way of sorting. It solves some of the problems of trying to group large amounts of text in a spreadsheet. d On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Dennis Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dingo, Thanks for the thought. I actually had to Google Tags to be sure I understood what you were suggesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tag_(metadata) I think this is what we are are trying to do with the search terms --come up with a group list of tags. More of an official collaborative tag list than a free-for-all. It appears from the wikipedia entry that this concept has taken on a new scope that I was oblivious to. Were you thinking of something more than this? BTW, I have trimmed this message because the really old parts were no longer readable so don't delete all the old messages before this one. BR, Dennis On Aug 31, 2008, at 2:33 PM, dingo wrote: The use of "tags" is a nice alternative. But you'll need a way to employ them. d On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Dennis Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, I have given some thought about different ways a Glossary could be used. The straight alphabetic listing, and the search terms have already been discussed. However, another one would be the ability to sort the list based on different sort criteria. For instance the official Amibroker functions list has two way to view it, either alphabetic or by functional category. I find both useful at different times. However, many times, I would like to have some additional functional categories, and we will be adding new categories that are not just functions to the Glossary. It seems to me that we need to have "columns" that represent other sort categories in addition to a column for search terms. Name, Description, AB min version#, Main Category, Sub Category, Alt Category, related Names, search terms It is easy to generate the list with just commas for columns and spaces for multiple terms. Although tabs for columns and commas for multiple terms is an option, it does not make the text version as readable. It would be easy to do this in a spread sheet format or a table format. The real trick would be to display the list formatted based on the criteria without having to display everything. Trivial to do with a program, but I am not sure how this could be done on the UKB other than presorting it all the different ways and displaying them all. Of course that makes for a lot more work to update the UKB entry. Of course, now we would need a list of categories to use. I would like to hear other thoughts or suggestions about this. Best regards, Dennis On Aug 30, 2008, at 11:49 PM, Dennis Brown wrote: > Hi reinsley, > > You have a good suggestion. Once we get the basic list together, if > someone wants to add a new item it would certainly be appropriate to > bring it up in this thread for now. That way it could be defined > right on the spot and then added to the Glossary. I doubt the > Glossary will be ably to be modified directly by anyone except the > owner of the post once it goes into the UKB. We would need a Wiki > type database to be able to do collaborative editing. A master list > should be available in one place in any case so someone else could use > it locally for searches in some other context. > > Best regards, > > > On Aug 30, 2008, at 1:26 PM, reinsley wrote: > >> >> Hello Dennis >> >> The glossary is a cornerstone. Great idea ! >> >> I suggest to keep a place for acronyms. >> >> Maybe as a way of doing to add entries, somebody that does not know >> the meaning of a word or of a functionnality could add the word in >> the >> list. >> Later an advanced user will feel free to add pedagogical >> explanations. >> Or many users will fill out the entrie. >> >> Best regards >> >> >> --- In [email protected], Dennis Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Keith, >>> >>> Here is what I would suggest. We only work on the first 10 items >>> collaboratively on-line here to start. We need to get good exposure >>> for this initially to get lots of good ideas from the list. >>> >>> I will be happy to keep a text file of all the changes and upload it >>> to the files section if needed and attach it to the post at each >>> logical round of changes. Of course anyone can attach a text file >>> to >>> the email version of this post which I and anyone who uses the email >>> option will get. >>> >>> Lets leave the formatting out until we get a round of feedback on >>> that. The first 10 should stimulate ideas for how we should format >>> the entries to make them most useful. >>> >>> Some initial discussion will help solidify the overall specs of the >>> final format. >>> >>> Tuzo and Mike, >>> >>> You suggested using Google docs to make a collaborative effort more >>> efficient. I like the idea if this was an independent project >>> with a >>> dedicated team. However, there are some things beyond just the end >>> result to accomplish here. >>> >>> 1. I would like to have this collaborative effort done in full view >>> of the community and the watchful eye of Tomasz. This is somewhat >>> of >>> an experiment and it can serve as a model to inspire future >>> community >>> wide collaboration on other projects with a wide benefit. If there >>> is >>> awkwardness, let's see if we can work around it, or demonstrate a >>> need >>> for additional ways for the community to interact productively. Of >>> course it would work better in a PHP Forum environment, but lets >>> work >>> with what we have now. >>> >>> 2. Suggestions should come from anyone. Even if they only want to >>> participate for just a single entry on the whole project. Having >>> too >>> much hidden away (out of site, out of mind) would deprive the >>> project >>> of good input. >>> >>> 3. EVERYONE will benefit from seeing each and every AFL or general >>> AmiBroker term defined in front of them again. Think of it as an >>> opportunity for new and old to review all the things available and >>> what they are good for. >>> >>> I am not the worlds greatest organizer, and I may have a tendency to >>> have my eye on the moon while seeing how high I can jump. I you >>> think >>> I am wrong about this approach (I acknowledge it is a bit awkward) >>> speak up and let's find a better way. :) >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Dennis >>> >>> On Aug 30, 2008, at 12:07 AM, Keith McCombs wrote: >>> >>>> Sounds good to me. >>>> >>>> However, is there somewhere we could have a document that we could >>>> all collaborate on without the text getting all garbled up by >>>> Yahoogroups, adding carriage returns, line feeds, and >? I believe >>>> there is some way to do this -- just don't know what that way is. >>>>
