Very nice "aha!". My take on this:
In effect, consider starting with a bunch of entities, with no
particular structure relating them to each other. (I don't say "nodes",
because that already implies a structure.) For example, imagine a
community of people, each an individual, but who interact with each
other in various ways, and are related to each other in various contexts
(family, employment, sports league, ...).
Now, we can look at this bunch in many different ways: family relation,
usage for a particular purpose, etc. Each way is then represented by an
attribute. (I agree that this isn't a particularly good term for it;
how about "view structure" -- awkward, but gets at the concept.)
I think, though, the "love clones, hate clones" problem may well arise
here, if the user isn't clear and fairly well disciplined in
conceptualizing views. (And of course new views will arise over time,
view may change, and various views may interact in strange ways: "He's
my boss at work, but my son at home!") I can imagine needing a view
structure to organize one's views...
Don
On 2/12/16 3:49 AM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 6:20 PM, 'Terry Brown' via leo-editor
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Might be worth a look at the backlinks plug-in, which provides a
mechanism and gui for superimposing a general graph on the tree.
Graphcanvas plug-in is just another gui for the same mechanism.
As I said in the original posting, the new scheme won't be used as a
general graph.
> Not
entirely sure I follow the 'attribute' part vs nodes,
At the implementation level, v.parents and v.children get swapped in
and out depending on which attribute is in effect for the /display/ of
the outline. The drawing code stays the same! It doesn't know about
the switcheroo.
>
Also long ago I did demo navigation of a cyclic graph using a tree,
not sure if that's relevant.
I think that's something different, because the new idea gives, in
effect, a set of layers (one per attribute). Each layer contains Leo's
existing tree structure.
>
Also recalling the sea of nodes idea that's surfaced periodically.
Thanks for reminding me of this! Iirc, this was B. H.'s (LeoUser's)
suggestion. At the time he made it, I had no idea what it meant. But
the Aha makes it perfectly clear. Yes, the "black" threading could be
called a preferred view, but it's just as valid to think of each node
as being /completely independent/ of all other nodes. Each node is an
island in the sea. Each node can participate in arbitrarily many
threadings/ trees.
>
Interesting direction, for sure.
To repeat what I said to Kent, the question I am presently asking
myself is what my work flow would be in the new scheme. In some
sense, I need a prototype, but I think pencil and paper will suffice.
In fact, I am considering what keystrokes/commands I would use as an
alternative to Ctrl-` (clone), etc. No conclusions yet. I won't do
anything until I am /sure/ that the new scheme actually simplifies Leo
for all users, including me.
Edward
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
