Martha, > None of the standard ways of organizing > information supported what we needed
This is what I was feeling about our work - I did not want to just copy the other applications. It would be great if we could produce something new and better. My mindmap exercise was a way to try to find a new 'bibliographic perspective'. We would be interested in the paper if you can find it. If not we could probably work out the relationships again. regards David On Sunday 29 May 2005 12:14 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Another thing is that there are 14 specific ways that documents can > relate to each other. For example, a document may be a stand-alone > document, part of a issue, or volume, a multi-work set, etc. I have the > article around here somewhere that lists the relationships if we are > going to have to consider that type of thing, but my concern is the > level of complexity we are discussing. When my team was designing the > DIADEM (Design of Interfaces and Databases for Electronic Media) > document-system prototype at OCLC, we iterated through four database > structures until finally just having a core schema for documents and > then associating attributes with that object-oriented structure (this > was back in the late 1980's). None of the standard ways of organizing > information supported what we needed -- we had started from a > bibliographic perspective and worked our way out from there. > Martha > > > Subject: > > A new approach to bibliographic style content analysis. > > From: > > David Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: > > Sat, 28 May 2005 11:57:32 +1000 > > To: > > [email protected] > > > > To: > > [email protected] > > > > > >Following on from the ideas recently discussed about a new approach to the > >OOoBib user interface. I have started a new analysis of the decision > >structure and attributes of a bibliographic system. However I did not > > start from library catalogue data as is usually done but from the Style > > Guide of the type the user might be attempting to implement / use. This > > provide some interesting insights. The mind-map I discuss below starts to > > suggest some user interface navigation options. > > > >For example, Matthias Basler suggested the idea that in dealing with > > Persons we could select a person from our list and then assign their > > relationship to the referenced work. I thought that their would be > > several relationships like Author, editor etc. but I have come up with 34 > > ! (see the list on the web page) and there are sure to more. So this > > approach is much better than having 34+ data entry boxes for each type of > > person ! > > > >I have put my first efforts at > >http://bibliographic.openoffice.org/mindmap/content-analysis.html > > > > > >Any comments would be welcome. > > > >regards > > > >David > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
