At 04:31 PM 9/14/01 -0700, Eric Armstrong wrote:
Alex Shapiro wrote:
> Have you
>> > checked
>> > out this paper by the
>> > way? http://www.cs.vu.nl/~frankh/postscript/VSW01.pdf What to you
The examples in this paper appear to me to reinforce the principles I
in a post quite a while back. Graphics work when there is
* a small set of
* fixed data types
* small sets of relationships
That allows one icon to be associated with each type. The graph can then
patterns or locations of the items. Graphs run into problems in one of
1) When the number of types grows large, there are too many icons to
keep track of, and no meaningful patterns emerge.
2) When the number of relationships grows large, the intersecting
lines in any graphic representation turns the picture into a confusion.
3) When the number of entries grows large, items are far removed from
each other, and the other end of any given relationship is rarely
visible in a given display area.
I note that the examples used in this paper have exactly two data types:
at the top level of the hierarchy, and something else (presumably a
"job" type) at
the second level of the hierarchy. I note that no information about the
contained in the graph. So the "information content" only goes one
At the second level of the hierarchy, the *only* information is the
number of jobs.
(Assuming that I am correctly interpreting the intent of the diagrams.)
individual bubbles would be useless for keeping track of jobs. They are
getting small and hard and select.
And it would take different types of
present any useful information.
Given these limitations, I don't see how graphing techologies apply at
collaborative design/discussion tools or a knowledge base, given the
volume of information such a tool needs to manage, the vast array of
information types, and the exponentially exploding number of
Perhaps TheBrain has something that could provoke a change of mind. I
can't say I've seen it (or recall what I saw, if I did). But as a simple
how would any of the information contained in this message be captured
a graph? Were it done, in what way would such a graph be of use to
I simply do not see graphing technology as useful in any substantive way
in a knowledge-engineering context. It's GREAT for visualizing small
systems, which makes it a wonderful tool for teaching. It gives people a
mental model of the systems. But in actual use? I'm still inclined to
|Yahoo! Groups Sponsor|
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sat Sep 15 2001 - 16:15:22 PDT