Jeremy Ruston wrote: > I think there are many structures that are easy enough to hold in our > heads but actually very hard to render as a 2D snapshot of a graph. It > feels to me that progressive disclosure is required to “unroll” the > portions of a potentially infinite visualisation space that we want to > explore (much like the TOC). Thus, apprehending a complex structure cannot > be accomplished merely contemplating a picture, it requires interactive > exploration. >
Totally agree. But assiting the user/explorer is an interesting issue. On the one hand we have great structuring principles that are basically, hierachical trees (lists in HTML) or more free form free text assembledge. * But in the middle, between them I hit issues. * For instance, I find it incredibly difficult to depict kinship correctly in TW (and most any other software too). The point about kinship is you have "objects" (people) and you have "relationships" (connections between them) and both need to figure in depiction, merged. Try it through tagging, lol. :-) Its a simple challenge case, I think, to illustrate the place where structure*S* merge. Its that merging to two levels of reality seamlessling: man+woman=child (conjunction) v. father -> son (innacurate hierarchy where half gets lost). Something like that. Thoughts Josiah -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" 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/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/3b1ee1cb-d582-42f2-a974-810222777a02%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
