I would say it should be in the reference doc also. Cheers Pieter
On 14/12/2015 13:04, Stephen Mallette wrote: > 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 >>>> >>
