Truthstructures
interfaced
finished, but I had to get something out there seeing as this has been
consuming my mind for the past year and a half.
Abstract
A plethora of data formats containing tales of daily life: bank
statements, event information, p2p messages, wish lists, video, image,
audio, notes, preferences, and statistics. In the current universe of
data, each interface incurs it's own specific data format. Though open
formats and microformats are encouraging reinterpretation of previously
locked in data, they remain separate categories; both in access and in
structure. By defining a new common structure based on human thought
processes, this paper will provide a means for non-linear semantic data
traversing, and multiple interface use.
Current tools for accessing diverse information formats are explored
with the intent to recreate/rethink the default interface. A method is
then introduced which amalgamates the prior methods through a common
approach. The challenges of multi-authorship and privacy are discussed
in relation to these methods and application. Finally, examples of
visualization under this common structure are explained.
general to today
A plethora of data formats encapsulate daily life: bank statements,
event information, p2p messages, wish lists, video, image, audio,
notes, preferences, statistics, etc...
specific solution of today
In the current universe of data, each interface infers it's own
specific data format.
problem of current state
Though open formats and microformats are encouraging reinterpretation
of previously locked in data, they remain separate categories; both in
access and in structure.
solution proposal
By defining a new common structure based on human thought, this paper
will provide a means for non-linear semantic data traversing, and
multiple application of interface use.
Contents
examine current apis & attempts at combination
Current tools for accessing diverse information formats are explored
with the intent to recreate/rethink the standard interface.
Introduce truthstructures as a tool/method
A method is then introduced which amalgamates the prior formats into a
common structure. The challenges of multi-authorship and privacy are
discussed in relation to this method and application.
Examples
Finally, examples of amalgamation and visualization under this common
structure are explained.
Reasons
social
shared information
There is no debate about the benefit of sharing information. The real
hang up in the discussion of knowledge sharing is how to do it most
efficiently. Other concerns such as privacy and intellectual property
affect the culture of sharing, but surely in time those concerns will
disappear in the face of greater benefits.
Knowledge is most valuable when applied to a problem or directed to the
right person to analyze and draw insights. Much of the knowledge in the
information world is redundant, usually unintentionally. The scientific
profession has evolved into a network of working bodies, aware of each
others work, and ideally working on complementary problems.
In the new paradigm of networked thought, ideas cannot not constrain
themselves to linear text documents. We must have a new method of
thought sharing, one that takes into consideration the overlap of
disciplines and concepts. We need a system of sharing where information
is not stacked but rather melded. I should be able to open 100 text
documents, and instead of having 100 pages to read, I now have 500
relations on one page, with shared concepts not repeated.
non-destructive recording
In the arena of shared information, revisions become the tool for a
self sustaining network. Wikipedia has shown us that many others in
different places can maintain a vast directory of information. Central
to the systems of networked knowledge is the ability to revise, edit,
and create without the explicit consent of others. Along with such a
system comes a history of edits, which within time becomes a very long
list.
What we need in the future is a format of non-destructive data. Any
information should contains it's own lifetime. This life time would
contain changes, updates, and offspring. Non-destructive data can
easily be viewed from different time periods and perspectives. This
type of data needs a central focus on connection between things rather
than a document which gets longer, this document gets denser.
designers
exchangeable interface
Even now, one can see a plethora of diverse data formats. These formats
encode information: bank statements, event information, p2p messages,
wish lists, video, image, audio, notes, preferences, statistics, etc...
Due to different type of applications, these formats have traditionally
been defined by interface requirements. There are thousands of
different format standards because there are thousands of interfaces.
Due to the internet, we are seeing an integration of interfaces. We can
now view RSS on a calendar<calendar.google.com>, real-estate on a
satellite map<housingmaps.com>, bookmarks through a node
web<http://www.hubmed.org/touchgraphs/deltags.php?start=visualization>,
and audio through lines and colours<itunes.com>. Though interfaces are
being adapted to data formats, data formats increasing diverge, making
it more difficult to apply new interfaces to existing data.
access through standard format
A streamline of data formats would democratize the interface
construction process as well as build new opportunities for interface
reusability. Truthstructures proposes a semantic markup with 2 basic
components: Concepts and relations. Using these basic properties, we
can describe the relation of information in an all encompassing system.
Forks are detrimental to progress, they signify a change of focus and
large amounts of commonality are lost for the sake of very minor
differences of opinion.
Conversation can only be productive when both parties are using the
same terms. Defining terms has become a profession for many academics,
since it must be done before proposing any new insights.
Truthstructures would allow non-destructive data manipulation through
relations, rather than the copying and changing methods of today's
technology.
unending traversing of structure
The common metaphor of computer operating systems has been files and
folders. The problem with such a systems is it's reliance on hierarchy
of information. The new method of information structures should be an
interconnected collection of concepts and relations. This web of
information should be able to be navigated infinitely, much like the
world wide web.
Though the web is a non-linear experience, it remains a non-linear
collection of linear information. The benchmark of a non-linear
information structure, is that meaning is created by the very act of
moving around the network. Each jump from one concept to another
through, a relation, is a statement. Meaning is created through a
history of information paths.
visualize concepts & relations
A non-linear structure of data should be an easy to visualize system.
Designers of all kinds should be able to interpret, and reinterpret the
structure of the data through analytical design. This technology should
be second nature to the way we as humans thing. Concepts are connects,
and it's is the value of their relations which is visualized through
various design practices.
users
collaborative data creation
Once we establish a non-linear method of editing, it is easy to see the
applications to collaborative development of such structures. Multiple
authors can simultaneously be adding and editing the same structure of
information, fully aware of the other's actions. We being to work on a
unified mass of observation, rather than diversified linear formats.
overlaying/comparable data
Truly one of the great benefits of a shared format is it's ability to
be compared. Imagine being able to overlay your thoughts upon another
person's truthstructure. You would immediately be aware(on a
qualitative level) of conflicts, shared ideas, and new ideas which you
have not considered. This qualitative information(due to the large
scale) could be further investigated by delving into the deeper
meanings of the connections of question.
decentralized ownership of data
Bit-torrent has shown us the engineering value of information being
shared across multiple platforms. Beyond just a quicker and persistent
storage method, shared records of the same events or idea, maintains
integrity in the nature of the data. Records are very difficult to
remove when they are distributed among a number of viewers.
popular acceptance of truth system
Just as in society, truths are subject to scientific scrutiny, and
accepted as valid by through a rating system. Ideas on the web are
popularized by linking to them; they spread if people feel strongly
enough about them. A system of truth recording should take this into
account and be able to distinguish widely held beliefs from fringe
opinion. It should be able to project quickly growing ideas as well as
trends which quickly drop in popular consciousness.
portable format
A key to the holistic system of recording truths, is the ability to
carry that information from one context to another. A personal
information cloud should follow the person from the grocery store, to
the bank, to work, and to sleep.
semantic
non-linear language
Extensible Markup Language has been a success largely due to the fact
it is a semantically meaningful format which is also readable by
software programs. The value of semantic encoding is that it allows for
understanding of new formats by developers, as well as an emergence of
functionality through creation of automated neural networks. The web is
moving to a more semantic structure through XHTML and XML, but it still
remains a collection of linear documents. We need a nonlinear,
non-redundant method of encoding, which is semantically useful, but
also distributed among perspectives.
semantic relations
Relations between concepts are verbs. They are actions which have
occurred at a specific time between two concepts. These are semantic
because the relation between things is labeled as an action, they are
useful to humans because the verb/noun paradigm has existed for a long
time.
shared focus(talking about the same thing)
Many problems, especially in the political sphere, have come about
because of purposeful distortion of issues. Framing is a popular way to
place concepts in a specific perspective which is advantages to the
advocates agenda. Many times, words are the source of confusion because
they carry meanings along with them. A good example is the difference
between a state and it's people. Both can be referred to as a country,
the USA for example. If I say the USA is corrupt it could be
interpreted in many ways. A concept is nothing without the relations
that connect it to it's conceptual sphere. By defining relations before
discussing a concept we can avoid double meanings and framing of
issues.
storing of actual observations rather than interpretations
The driving force behind truthstructures is it's ability to record
observation and not interpretations. When information is recorded
digitally, it is usually interpreted and therefore stored in an
interpreted format. For example, if a piece of content is rated by 5
people as 1,3,5,4, and 6, it is stored as 3.8, an average between
numbers. An observational based record would store each rating as a
time-stamped occurrence.
The difference between interpretative recording and observational
recording is in the storage of information. Interpretive recording
makes assumptions about the information, it slims it down and then
records it's interpretations. Observational recording takes raw
time-based observations and allows interpretation to occur at the
interface level. The advantage of Interpretational recording is it's
small size, the advantage of observational recording is it's ability to
be reapplied to many different contexts, and new connections to be
made.
Spread
Personal Applications
Thomas Vander Wal http://www.personalinfocloud.com/ has already begun
to investigate ways to merge the growing cloud of information that
surrounds our lifestyle. Truthstructures is a perfect match for the
personal information cloud, it's format is very complementary to the
varied range of information in our clouds.
It is clear that the average person will not adapt truthstructures as
the new organizational environment. A very important principle of
truthstructures is it's need to be available through many contexts and
interfaces. Applications can feed into truthstructures and display the
relations and concepts in many different ways.
Calendars
Calendars are by nature a recording of event based information. These
events are relations between a person or persons, and a specific place.
The relations in these calendars lend themselves to being stored as
event based information, but also place information. Some information
is better entered into calendars, others into time-sheets, others into
maps. All of this information should draw from the same base but be
interpreted by different interfaces.
Communications
There is a rise in communication products designed for specific
purposes. For an event I send an invite, or an image I share an image
page, for an article I click on the article link, for a product I send
a recommendation. Up until recently, the prominent method of
communication has been email. All of these different message types have
pushed themselves into a text based format with external links. These
messages that are being sent are really just representations of
occurrences, or truths. I recommend something to someone, I created an
event and add a person to the guest list, these are statements of
truth. I should be able to accept or reject truths. Instead of
exchanging disconnected messages, we begin to work on a holistic data
cloud. The communication comes from the creation of truth.
Surveys
A large need in today's economy is one of consumer opinion. Survey
applications are traditionally done as a form of questions. The answers
are then stored in a database. Once the information is collected, it is
analyzed and then kept to the research group as a valuable private
asset. This preference information is repeated over and over, every
time I fill out a survey I am answering questions which are redundant
due to my previous surveys. The main problem with surveys is that the
information is stored by the researcher and not by the participant.
Researchers should be able to propose questions, but the information
should be stored on the user's end. This would allow researchers to
request access to consumer information. It would cut down on the
workload of research, the researcher's would know what questions have
already been asked, and it would put the power in the hands of the
person of question.
Structure
-concepts(id,type,title,description)
-relations(from, to,time,duration)
-truths(believer concept,belief concept)
Examples
-undecided
-truthbuilder
-hive
Traditional systems
take actual events and record them as abstract(person likes chocolate,
chocolate=1, 1 star)
This system
Records actual events and the interface interprets them into
abstract(person likes chocolate, person-likes->chocolate, 1 star)
OH...@aol.com
What's the rest of the story - where are the visuals? I get Vanderwaal's persistent cloud( maybe even different clouds for different contexts) but I don't see the path to TS presented here.
Is there more?
Dave Davison
www.thoughts-illustrated.blogspot.com
interfaced
One example is http://www.theundecided.ca/
You can see the back end application at:
http://themovement.info/truthstructures/ts1.png
http://themovement.info/truthstructures/ts2.png
http://themovement.info/truthstructures/ts3.png
some working models
http://themovement.info/truthstructures/truthbuilder_pragmatic.swf
http://themovement.info/truthstructures/truthbuilder_springs.swf
http://themovement.info/truthstructures/truthbuilder.swf
It will also be used for the social network we are working on, Hive: