Yiannis has laid out some interesting ideas for a SoC effort. Here are a few additionaI ideas that aim at some very specific enhancements to Arches:
> Develop a workflow for uploading a GIS shapefile to Arches. A basic version of this would allow Arches users to upload a shapefile (with a pre-defined set of attributes). A more advanced version of the workflow might include a UI to map an "arbitrary" set of shapefile attributes to a particular set of entities in a graph. > Extend Arches GIS digitizing tools to include more sophisticated geometries (e.g.: multi polygons, polygons with holes) and the associated metadata for geospatial data. > Allow direct upload of GPS data to Arches. This workflow could allow a user to upload a gpx file to define the geometries for a specific resource. > Build a "User Settings" page that will allow people to save their preferences for things like > Incorporate the CIDOC CRM (perhaps as a plugin) to Gephi to better support the ability to create graphs for inclusion in Arches > Make the Arches Administrative interface, used to configure various Arches variables and settings, more user friendly > Extend the current model for representing cultural periods to a more spatial-temporal representation. For example, providing better support for distinguishing the distinction in time and space for "Iron Age" (the time and extent of this concept varies depending on where you are. It represents different times in Australia, Greece, and Germany). > Work on representing Arches' geospatial data using a richer set of CRM classes. Gerald Hiebl is working on extending the CRM for GIS data, this task could work on incorporating his ideas into Arches. This might be an interesting effort for people who are into ontologies and rdf. - Dennis On Wednesday, February 12, 2014 6:01:19 PM UTC-8, Yiannis Avramides wrote: > > Dennis and Alexei no doubt have already given this more thought than I > have, and there is a > set<https://bitbucket.org/arches/arches/issues?status=new&status=open&component=Advanced%20Search>of > items marked "Advanced Search" currently on the issue tracker. Some are > minor and even cosmetic, but others represent bigger improvements. Re: > temporal search in particular, there are several things to say and others > may add: > > * There are multiple dates that can be associated with Resource (e.g. by > specifying the bounds of a related cultural period, by recording a date > obtained from an absolute dating method, > and even the date when a condition was observed or when a building > received legal protection). A way (and a design) for searching across or > within these different pieces of information would be a good feature. An > example of a search that would have obvious relevance for users would be a > search for resources (maybe of a certain period) that have not been > inspected since a certain date. I can probably think of others. > * A way to search for resources (and it's probably more helpful to think > about searching for Activities and not Heritage Resources) before/after a > certain date, or that were ongoing throughout a time period, etc. would > also be a good feature. > * On the UI side, there is an old mockup that shows a set of sliders, and > perhaps someone has a link to another web app where this has been > implemented. > * The project would probably have something to do also with how time is > represented in the CRM. > > I hope this helps a bit. > > Yiannis > > On Tuesday, February 11, 2014 10:17:59 PM UTC-5, Karl Fogel wrote: >> >> Yiannis Avramides <[email protected]> writes: >> >As has been said recently, some new development in the future will >> >concentrate on Advanced Search during the LA customization, but there >> >probably are parts of Advanced Search that could be profitably carved >> >out for an effort like this, either because they are self-contained or >> >because they are features that are not required by this particular >> >dataset and implementation but would otherwise be useful. For example, >> >one component might be a more robust temporal search that can >> >integrate different ways of representing time and time intervals, and >> >perhaps across Resource Types (I am thinking about Activities in >> >particular). Koen, you might have something to add since I think this >> >was/is a research interest of yours. I'm sure others have thoughts on >> >this too. >> >> This sounds like it might be a good SoC-sized project... could you flesh >> it out a bit more? (Give some examples of the kinds of temporal >> searches you mean, etc?) >> >> Dennis et al are compiling our SoC Ideas List right now (the Ideas List >> is actually part of our application, so this step is not just for fun), >> but they're watching followups here of course. >> >> >And perhaps it's also worth looking at the Roadmap, since as Rainer >> >pointed out there are some missing items that didn't make it into v. >> >1.0. Import/export functions might be interesting possibilities, for >> >example. >> >> +1, yup. >> >> -K >> > -- -- To post, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]. For more information, visit https://groups.google.com/d/forum/archesproject?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Arches Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
