.father
.son
.son's daughter
.father + .mother
.son + .wife
.daughter
This a difficult logical problem, not just in TW, but in much software.Bear with me.An issue is we use HTML lists for representation of structural hierarchy.
We go good at nesting them and delving through complex nested hierachy (e.g. bimlas' excellent recent work).
But there is still a probem.The problem is combining equality with hierachy.To try make this clearer. Its easy in TW to, through tagging, accurately depict ...
.father
.son
.son's daughterbut very difficult to depict
.father + .mother
.son + .wife
.daughter
I'm not sure you may even understand what I'm talking about.
ONE this is very clear to me is that HTML lists can only depict SINGULAR HIERARCHY. It can branch but it can't conjoin. That is a serious limitation on the depiction of actual things.
On 9 Jul 2019, at 21:51, @TiddlyTweeter <Tiddly...@assays.tv> wrote:
Repeat for those on email
On Tuesday, 9 July 2019 22:50:40 UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
This a difficult logical problem, not just in TW, but in much sortware.
Bear with me.An issue is we use HTML lists for representation of structural hierarchy.We go good at nesting them and delving through complex nested hierachy (e.g. bimlas' excellent recent work).But there is still a probem.The problem is combining equality with hierachy.To try make this clearer. Its easy in TW to, through tagging, accurately depict ...
.father
.son
.son's daughterbut very difficult to depict
.father + .mother
.son + .wife
.daughter
I'm not sure you may even understand what I'm talking about.ONE this is very clear to me is that HTML lists can only depict SINGULAR HIERARCHY. It can branch but it can't conjoin. That is a serious limitation on the depiction of actual things.Like every net thing TW is limited by what is expressed in HTML. But I think its an interesting issue. Some limitations, I think, in TW, arise directly out of the limits of HTML lists.ThoughtsJosiah
--
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 tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
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/fa8ad5f5-89c2-4945-9bdb-9a3dcdd2d12d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
I'm not sure you may even understand what I'm talking about.
Repeat for those on email
I'm not sure you may even understand what I'm talking about.Correct ;-)
Is the "starting point" the daughter?
And you want a view of how relationships propagate upward?Repeat for those on emailDo the people using the email lists never get the initial message of a thread?
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.
NO. Its the RELATION
I know we've touched on this previously and that you're experienced in this matter. Do you have an image of how such a visualization could look and that you're hoping TW could replicated?
In your image, could you encircle all the individual relations that should be represented?And I'll say it right away, I'm not sure I can help, just so the expectations don't jump too high. But, who knows.
It looks easy at Level 1. But at the level of my "Father's Eldest Brother's Youngest Daughter's First Daughter" I'm not so sure. That is a description of a relationship chain. How many tags would that be, just to represent the linkages between "Father" and .... "First Daughter"?
Part of the issue with depicting kinship anthropologists solved well was to clear delineation between AFFINITY (roughly, marriage) and DESCENT (roughly, children). If you can figure a way to do that so that each person is BOTH potentailly an AFFINE and a DESCENDENT (but diferentiable) in an economic way I'd be interested. My suspicion is you will rapidly get swamped in tags and not find a solution beyond generation 3 from complexity. :-)
Of course I can draw them in TW manually. But for the life of me I can't figure out how to generate this ...The issue at first looks easy. But its difficult.
Mark S: Are we talking about modeling relationships, or about portraying them?
NOT so much: "My Uncle Fred"
AS: "My Father's Youngest Brother".
Mark S: With the right structure, you should be able to produce lists of whatever relationships you want to know about.
Portraying the relationships graphically is a different matter,
PMario: Just think about relations which contain divorce, death and marriage, 2 fathers, 2 mothers + Children in every possible combination.
Jed: I think that the most difficult part here would be routing the lines for when a group of siblings has more than three parents between them. It becomes difficult to display the parents on one line with the chilhren below them without lines crossing.
bimlas: Just a quick thought: you might want to think about "text to UML diagram" tools like Mermaid flowchart (TiddlyWiki plugin) or one of the PlantUML generators (TiddlyWiki plugin). The structure could be converted with the wikify widget to the text needed to create the UML diagram.
TonyM: ... I am confident this can all be encapsulated in tiddlywiki and that producing the graphical representation of such relationships is a matter of user interface design.
I recommend working on the fundamental structure and organisation. The representation really is just eye candy.
Regards
Tony