Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Icons for IBIS
In Mifflin, we keep the type constant (i.e. once a Pro, always a Pro). I
wouldn't fall on my sword to defend that this approach is inherently "more
right" than, say, the QuestMap approach (in which a node can be one of
three types (Pro, Con, or Argument) as it appears in multiple nodes).
Here's our reasoning: (01)
- Nodes that have multiple types have a sort of 'identity crisis' -- it's
tough to keep track of their nature and identity if they appear differently
in different places. This can cause user/participant disorientation. (02)
- Taking a multiple type approach puts more emphasis on pure argumentation
(and, I'd argue, rather arcane aspects of argumentation) than we've found
to be truly useful in applied situations (that is, purist approaches to
IBIS may be purer, but many researchers and our own substantial practical
experience has found them to be of somewhat questionable actual usefulness;
I'd be happy to provide citations). (03)
- If an idea truly is to serve opposing meanings (types) in different
views, perhaps the question-idea-argument should be reframed, usually by
changing what is a "shifting" argument to an Idea (or Answer, Position,
etc.) that can be argued for/against without resorting to chameleon nodes. (04)
Al (05)
"Peter Jones" <ppj@concept67.fsnet.co.uk>@bootstrap.org on 04/10/2002
01:01:29 PM (06)
Please respond to ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org (07)
Sent by: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org (08)
To: <ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org>
cc: (09)
Subject: [ba-unrev-talk] Icons for IBIS (010)
This question is addressed to those folks out there implementing GUIs
for IBIS.
If I have a particular node in a discussion that is marked as a
positive,
and I then transclude that node into another discussion where I
want it to play the part of a negative, how do I do that given that
I want to maintain the identity of the node across the two discussions?
Are the icons independent of node identity? (011)
--
Peter (012)