Re: [Comp-hist-devel] 1.0

[Kurt R. <ku...@ra...>]

Below are my thoughts on this subject:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 06:51:11AM -0400, Scott Fenton wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 07:36:33AM +0100, the keyboard of Hans B Pufal wrote:
> > Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >  
> > > I think we are not ready to release 1.0 We've got a lot of data about a lot
> > > of different OSes and computers and ... but we don't have any convenient
> > > means to display it. We've got our parsers to graphvidz and vcg but we've
> > > got far too much information to display so it is not usable. As I already
> > > wrote, we've got to sort all the data we've got with respect to its
> > > importance if we want to simplify the display.
> > 
> > I completely agree, we need to sort out the data and provide a better
> > display facility, based on html/xml.
> 
> An XML database sounds like an interesting idea. I'll look into it.
If we develop a decent DTD for it, then all someone would need would be an XML capable browser, if all they wanted to do was view it in a text format.
> > 
> > I would also repeat a suggestion I made some time ago - a facility for
> > anyone to be able to provide input simply. I see this as being an edit
> > link on each displayed node, a form pops up with that node's data and
> > the user can edit/add information. When the form is submitted, it is
> > saved in an edit file which is immediatley visible to subsequent users
> > but allows us to moderate what goes into the definitive database.
> > 
> 
> Sounds like an interesting compromise. I'll have to see.
I think my web form already /sort of/ provides for this, doesn't it?
> > The problem I see at this point is that in order for anyone to provide
> > real input they need to download, make and manually search the database,
> > many very knowledgable folks with valuable input will not be willing to
> > do that.
> > 
> > > We'll also have to write a visualization library which suits our needs (and
> > > maybe we'll use our c parser which currently is not really useful). Indeed,
> > > with all the data we've got, we should provide an easy way to visualise it
> > > and to browse through it. If we decide to write a visualization library, I'm
> > > not sure whether we should integrate it in 1.0 or not. We also have to find
> > > what is the most appropriate means of displaying our database.
> > 
> > Take a look at the CCC search page for a simple way of
> > searching/displaying.
> > 
(I've snipped a bit here.)
With regard to visualization, how about VRML?  That way, importance sould be shown by depth, as in the closer to you, the more important.  We'd probably also wnat to include Scott's idea of being able to collapse the tree by file, so that each file could be collapsed into one node.  For providing access to additional information, we could set things up so that clicking on a node takes you into a VRML "subworld" where we could add whatever information is appropriate.

-Kurt