oh - i see. i go into that in some detail in "Getting Started" in the "Next Fifteen MInutes" section. I could make that more clear there. What if i added "out vertex" and "in vertex" to 1 and 3 in that first image in that section? would that be good? or do you think we should include something in the reference docs too?
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 5:52 AM, pieter-gmail <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, should have been more explicit. > > Slide 24 shows a diagram illustrating on an edge the direction and which > side is the in and which side is the out vertex. > > person1 ----------knows----------->person2 > outV outE inV > > It will be nice if a similar illustration can be at the start of the > docs to clarify the convention regarding which side is in and out. > > Thanks > Pieter > > On 14/12/2015 12:42, Stephen Mallette wrote: > > I'm not sure what you mean (the link just goes to the start of marko's > > slides - can you maybe just issue a pull request to the reference docs > and > > we can review? i assume it's not a big change you're looking for? > > > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 4:03 AM, pieter <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> Every now and again I need to confirm for myself, on an edge, which side > >> is the in and out vertex. > >> > >> The current modern graph docs does not illustrate this. > >> > >> @marko slides > >> < > >> > http://www.slideshare.net/slidarko/acm-dbpl-keynote-the-graph-traversal-machine-and-language > >> here does. > >> > >> It will be useful if the current docs can also illustrate this. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Pieter > >> > >
