This is related to this thread in which a potential FP user expressed consternation RE FP documentation being out of date and confusing (not to mention frustrating/infuriating).
I have volunteered to help update the FP documentation map. I generally do better with proper supervision, so comments and corrections are welcome.
Review of the Freemind documentation map led me to believe it is better structured and easier to use. My plan is to base a FP documentation map on the FM mind - deleting FM-specific stuff while adding FP-specific stuff.
As I mentioned in the other thread, I hate digging thru tons of text, especially in a mindmap - where keywords rule. So that is the approach I intend to take, although I realize some sections lend themselves more readily to keywords and other sections not so much.
Ken, let us talk about how we could help you. I think that the content can basically be reviewed for correctness, completeness, language and formatting issues.
I suggest that you post here requests for reviews branch wise and tell which of the four aspects should be checked. This way we could review only already implemented aspects at the already finished parts of the map when you request it and you could parallely work on other issues or parts.
Just my 2 cents.
How do you find it?
Dimitry
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I need to find the original hotkey shortcuts that ship with FP. I've made so many chances on my installation that I'm kind of at a loss. I've looked online but cannot find a list.
Is there a way I can temporarily revert to the pristine shipped-with configuration without losing the changes I've made?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Sorry, i am almost ssleeping, it is night here. So the last answer for today : rename file accelerator.properties in your user config directory so that it is not considered by freeplane
Last edit: Dimitry Polivaev 2016-08-07
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
As I was editing and organizing the proposed documentation map, I was struck with an idea that could enhance both the user experience and the map production.
Attached is a screenshot of a filtered section : "Editing node text" and a child node : "split node". For ease of finding them I colored the node and put the exclamation icon -- these will not be in the final version.
The thought : when a user gets to this node and thinks "I don't quite get this 'split node' stuff; I wish there was a demo" - I propose that we have said demo ready made. Below is a link to a quick and dirty video on the "split node" feature. I envision having a video for each major level 1 node that briefly covers all the material in the branch. At each level 2 node in the map, we could link to the place in the video (hosted on youtube) where that branch is covered.
Each level 2 branch (e.g., "split node") video would not to be much longer than the one linked below.
I believe this could be a big benefit to users but it also could help us discover gaps in the documentation. I think it could set Freeplane apart and raise awareness and interest in potential users - and support for current users.
If you watch the video, you will quickly discover I am not the best video maker. It would be great if a proven Freeplane-qualified video artists - like Peter Carruthers or Bill McDonald or others - could make the videos, using the peer-reviewed documentation map as the agenda. I don't think it would hurt to have videos made by different people.
I will keep working on the map as quickly as I can, without worrying about videos (although, again, videos would be a good check against map quality and completeness). Perhaps the map itself will be documentation 2.0 while video augmentation would be documentation 3.0.
As Dimitry pointed out : we probably are going to have to make two maps - a windows and mac (and maybe Linux?). I hope it doesn't come to that but the same considerations would apply to supplementary videos.
[edit] as you probably noticed the actual instructions are reversed order. You should move the cursor to the point you want split - then press Alt + S. I have fixed the map. Sorry. You should still get the general idea of what I'm proposing.
Ken, when you talk about split notes, and I am a person who has used Freeplane for a long time, and Freemind before that, I have no idea what you're talking about. I say that very gently. I think we might be trying to document much deeper than 95% of users are going to need.
People use Microsoft Word like a typewriter, hardly ever touching any of the features that Microsoft is so proud of. I think we should try and touch that user first, give them the confidence to do simple stuff, and then, once the confident, show them how to explore the menu structure.
I'm a little bit embarrassed to ask the question I must ask next. I can't open the maps that you posting in my current version of Freeplane. I think you are a couple of revisions ahead of me. (I raised this issue to show you that most of us have no idea what's going on.) How can I run the latest Freeplane version alongside the stable version on my Mac ( El Capitan)?
I will put good money on 95% of your users not using 95% of the features, which is why you don't get that kind of angry response to often, I suspect.
I genuinely think that you wonderful guys might be a little close to the problem because you are so familiar with the software.
Finally, every new student I have, currently about 600, sends me a mind map detailing their previous life experience. For every 20, of all ages, that send me a comprehensive map with a couple of "funny bits" that I have no idea how they achieved, just one matters about it not doing what he wants. These are people ranging from 13 to 78 I offer this as a perspective. For the comments made in the earlier post from that angry fellow.
Finally, as a balance, I spent my day building three new presentations, gathering data from all over the place into a series of mind maps, the combination of which will make me an awful amount of money over the next year or so. In the midst of all of these interesting challenges please don't forget that you guys are doing an amazing job, an incredible job, and you're allowing the rest of us to play with your toys for free. Not many people do that. It is a very noble thing that you are doing.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
In the midst of all of these interesting challenges please don't forget that you guys are doing an amazing job, an incredible job, and you're allowing the rest of us to play with your toys for free. Not many people do that. It is a very noble thing that you are doing.
I second that! All that code & design a lot to keep organized and managed, noty least of all if you have day job or a life.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I'm getting my thoughts together but -- what version are you using? I assume your students use the same version? I am using 1.5.14 but here, the map opens fine in 1.5.13 (current stable version I just downloaded and installed).
Thanks.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I wonder if the point Peter is making here relates to the old "GPF" error message that Microoft code preoduceed? "General Ptection Fault at ..." might of been of great use to programmers debuggin application code that did not conform to the recomendations Microsoft put ut, but it annoyed users and eventually the PTB@microsoft had it removed.
Just sayin' ....
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Could someone look at the existing freeplane tutorial and think about whether it should be reworked of rather checked, corrected or just shortified and if there are essential gaps there?
If it is too long to be read let us just make it so short that checking the remaining part is not a big deal any more?
I was told that Peter is going to produce some videos. And Jonas (from Brazil, also not a native speaker either) was also going to do so.
Would it make sense to develop a plan to synchronize all the efforts?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I think I was not clear enough in my intention. I would love to have a documentation in a form Ken has proposed. After reading posts from Peter I am just not sure if it is a real problem for the beginners and also if how much effort should be put there. For me writing documentation always is a significant effort. Therefore I wanted to ask once again if yuo and particularly Ken are thinking it is the right thing to do.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I will try and post a short video on the subject in the next 48 hours, just the "start-up" for some using it for the first time. It takes a little thought to work out what should be left out!
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Personally I think that, for new users, it is better to have a normal, linear, pdf-like user's manual.
Doing so allows for explaining basic features / usages first (at the first pages of the document). After the user gains some experiences with Freeplane, he / she can continue reading later pages.
On the other hand, if we used a mindmap to explain Freeplane features, I think some users might feel frustrated because they wouldn't know where to start reading or what to do when they first open the map.
Just my 2 cents.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Most users (I guess almost all) just try to use new programs without reading a manual. Only if that fails they might possibly search for a manual (but most will uninstall the program).
So I think we have to present them the essential information they need on the map they get presented when they open Freeplane for the very first time. We could copy from other mind mapping apps and start with a basic map containing only 5 to 10 nodes. (The whole content must fit onto every imaginable first window size.)
One of these nodes should teach the user to open a link to a introductory video.
Another link could lead to a manual. I agree with Robert that a linear manual could be better than another map.
The initial map could be kind of a tutorial by teaching the user to unfold nodes where more information can be found for slightly advanced users.
If the Freeplane installation is an upgrade then users might prefer the new features map that we have.
I am a bit provocative here, but I really want to ask you one question: If we have the probably most powerful tool for information sharing why should we use all other ways like pdf or videos first? Shouldn't we eat our own dog food?
In my first ever contact with Freemind about 15 years ago I knew nothing about mind mapping. So the FreeMind documentation map was not just an application manual but also the ultimative example of a mind map and the proof demonstrating how the information can be structured. It convinced me and you know the rest.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The initial map could be kind of a tutorial by teaching the user to unfold
nodes where more information can be found for slightly advanced users.
If the Freeplane installation is an upgrade then users might prefer the new
features map that we have.
In a previous post I did ask Jeff Langston if he had ever used a mindmap before.
At this point in this thread I think we need to differentiate between people who
have NEVER EVER used a mindmap or similar graphic tool and do need the basics,
and those that have used some other mindmap and need to know what makes FP
individual, the menus, the hot keys, what the options do.
As for the "never" group, in my experience there are those who have learnt in
the past such things Excel where you can click to 'unfold'/'fold' a group of
lines or in a hierarchical file manager where you can click to 'unfold'/'fold'
part of the file system tree; some of those people understand the principle and
can easily extend that 'unfold'/'fold' concept to other settings. Some people,
in my experience, don't see the patterns and cues. I'd not that this has
nothing to do with other aspects of intelligence; we learn in different ways.
The left-brain/right-brain concept may have been discredited but the idea that
some people are text oriented, some image oriented, some number oriented seems
to hold.
I started with mindmaps on blackboards and flip charts in the early 1970s;
having a computer 'whiteboard' that was indefinitely extensible and where you
could 'hide' details by collapsing a node just as I could with spreadsheet rows
in Excel was wonderful! So wonderful that I could forgive any other UI bumps.
It was only as products evolved and I became more experienced did I become more
critical.
Just like there are some people who can work on any engine, any piece of
machinery with no formal education and no manual (but aren't autistic enough to
be called 'idiot savants') I seem to be able to pick up and use all the software
I've ever met. Its not all been to my liking for a variety of reasons, but I
could never write the kind of review Jeff did. I might criticise UI and display
aesthetics, engineering aesthetics, marketing aesthetics, but they could all get
a response of "Well, that's your opinion and everyone's entitled to his
opinion". Jeff gave a detailed and REDUCTIONIST critique. Such things have
nothing to do with the aesthetics of production, be it staff, in any form, nor
the value or suitability of the product.
Its pretty axiomatic in the computer & software industry that if you draw a Venn
diagram of the developers, the instrumentalists and the marketing there is very
little if any overlap. What is more surprising to many is that journalist and
reviewers don't even appear on the same chart.
--
It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error.
--Robert H. Jackson, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1950
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Being a text type person I can undestand your sentiments.
But I disagree for a number of reasons.
A Well Designed mindmap can, to people who are willing to accomodate visual navigation and read the labels and not be overwhelmed by rococo and/or Victorian curlicules and decorations, allow faster, more immediate access than wading though pages of linear text. (Its one reason I don't like the 'organic' style of Peter Bunyan's mindmaps.)
For example, I've reduced a 8-page resume to a single, easily comprehensible mindmap
I've reduced a 23 page powerpoint presentation to a single, easily comprehesible mindmap.
But the issue is "easily comprehesaible" to who?
I've met recruiters 20, 30 years younger than myself, who did not comprehend the idea of a resume on a web site where you clicked to a new page for each historic job or the skills ummary or cross linking between them. Their minds were locked in to paper copy for resumes. These same people were quite happy with Facebook and Twitter. Talk about compartmentalization!
To me, the "solution" Robertonisola seems hinting at is a WIKI rather than a PDF, something where, like a mindmap, the user can drill down for futher detail if he wants. Thanks to Wikipedia most people out there are familiar with navigating a wiki and its easy enough to set it up with a feedback section and have a small group who are authorized to revise it.
Hey, doen't Sourceforge support a wiki mechanism for its groups?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Oisín Mac Fhearaí, in my view Freeplane can be used as impressive tool for knowledge representation. Recently Quinbus has shared one impressive example at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kkv4tly0j4v086b/AABNmC4ESxRt8Nkk8blFI25Ha?dl=0 . You need to download the whole folder as a zip and to extract it locally because there are also image files needed ar right positions. Could you check it and tell us what you think?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
What you say is true about the difficulty to understand how to go about someone elses mindmap. Wouldn't it be possible to map and give directions to move arround the mindmap? Map the Mindmap. To design and guide the reader in a route around the mindmap?
I started to use mindmaps and mindmap software not too long ago and what I had to struggle with my own map, was the initial layout of the map. Mindmaps where not very useful at first, and the content was not lacking. What was penalizing was how to navigate and put the information in meaningful way.
" meaningful way" is a term that can be very subjective, or is there a best practice to make a mind map easily readable? I think there is and not necessarily writing in a linear method.
Last edit: maggv 2016-08-11
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I understand what you mean. (the instructions on how to read the instructions). No, I don't want that. But "milestones" that tell you what to do next. Connectors that tell you where to go next. I am just brainstorming now.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
This is related to this thread in which a potential FP user expressed consternation RE FP documentation being out of date and confusing (not to mention frustrating/infuriating).
I have volunteered to help update the FP documentation map. I generally do better with proper supervision, so comments and corrections are welcome.
Review of the Freemind documentation map led me to believe it is better structured and easier to use. My plan is to base a FP documentation map on the FM mind - deleting FM-specific stuff while adding FP-specific stuff.
As I mentioned in the other thread, I hate digging thru tons of text, especially in a mindmap - where keywords rule. So that is the approach I intend to take, although I realize some sections lend themselves more readily to keywords and other sections not so much.
A sample from one of the sections is at https://www.dropbox.com/s/4cdgu4sbbhtxyib/documentation%20sample.png?dl=0
For more of the previous discussion about this effort, check here and below.
===========
If anyone wants to check out the progress:
I have the files I'm working with in a dropbox folder - https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a3k0tldv4un3fye/AADVmHiOnAyEGpJIPHkqq4VDa?dl=0
The main documentation map is
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h30ilo4jd5jot8u/freemind%202%20freeplane%20documentation.mm?dl=0
I'm doing this to gather suggestions / corrections and to make my efforts transparent. Also to keep me accountable.
The icons I'm using are in an icons folder. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/igywz8fdr5e1gtz/AAD15G-_7g2dP8RppvVSfHMra?dl=0
The original FP resources include some images. I don't know if they are original or not. They are in
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sym4m2bpjmg34hs/AACXgVliKd9ecguSbQz7jGL2a?dl=0
Ken, let us talk about how we could help you. I think that the content can basically be reviewed for correctness, completeness, language and formatting issues.
I suggest that you post here requests for reviews branch wise and tell which of the four aspects should be checked. This way we could review only already implemented aspects at the already finished parts of the map when you request it and you could parallely work on other issues or parts.
Just my 2 cents.
How do you find it?
Dimitry
I need to find the original hotkey shortcuts that ship with FP. I've made so many chances on my installation that I'm kind of at a loss. I've looked online but cannot find a list.
Is there a way I can temporarily revert to the pristine shipped-with configuration without losing the changes I've made?
Sorry, i am almost ssleeping, it is night here. So the last answer for today : rename file accelerator.properties in your user config directory so that it is not considered by freeplane
Last edit: Dimitry Polivaev 2016-08-07
Dimitry,
Sounds fine.
I'll probably have to set up a map to keep me organized and on schedule.
As I was editing and organizing the proposed documentation map, I was struck with an idea that could enhance both the user experience and the map production.
Attached is a screenshot of a filtered section : "Editing node text" and a child node : "split node". For ease of finding them I colored the node and put the exclamation icon -- these will not be in the final version.
The thought : when a user gets to this node and thinks "I don't quite get this 'split node' stuff; I wish there was a demo" - I propose that we have said demo ready made. Below is a link to a quick and dirty video on the "split node" feature. I envision having a video for each major level 1 node that briefly covers all the material in the branch. At each level 2 node in the map, we could link to the place in the video (hosted on youtube) where that branch is covered.
Each level 2 branch (e.g., "split node") video would not to be much longer than the one linked below.
I believe this could be a big benefit to users but it also could help us discover gaps in the documentation. I think it could set Freeplane apart and raise awareness and interest in potential users - and support for current users.
If you watch the video, you will quickly discover I am not the best video maker. It would be great if a proven Freeplane-qualified video artists - like Peter Carruthers or Bill McDonald or others - could make the videos, using the peer-reviewed documentation map as the agenda. I don't think it would hurt to have videos made by different people.
I will keep working on the map as quickly as I can, without worrying about videos (although, again, videos would be a good check against map quality and completeness). Perhaps the map itself will be documentation 2.0 while video augmentation would be documentation 3.0.
As Dimitry pointed out : we probably are going to have to make two maps - a windows and mac (and maybe Linux?). I hope it doesn't come to that but the same considerations would apply to supplementary videos.
Any ideas/comments/suggestions.
video https://www.dropbox.com/s/9hwvolunpkz7r5a/split%20node.wmv?dl=0
[edit] as you probably noticed the actual instructions are reversed order. You should move the cursor to the point you want split - then press Alt + S. I have fixed the map. Sorry. You should still get the general idea of what I'm proposing.
Last edit: Ken Hill 2016-08-08
Left out Jonas - sorry. I know there are others - sorry to leave anyone out.
Ken, when you talk about split notes, and I am a person who has used Freeplane for a long time, and Freemind before that, I have no idea what you're talking about. I say that very gently. I think we might be trying to document much deeper than 95% of users are going to need.
People use Microsoft Word like a typewriter, hardly ever touching any of the features that Microsoft is so proud of. I think we should try and touch that user first, give them the confidence to do simple stuff, and then, once the confident, show them how to explore the menu structure.
I'm a little bit embarrassed to ask the question I must ask next. I can't open the maps that you posting in my current version of Freeplane. I think you are a couple of revisions ahead of me. (I raised this issue to show you that most of us have no idea what's going on.) How can I run the latest Freeplane version alongside the stable version on my Mac ( El Capitan)?
I will put good money on 95% of your users not using 95% of the features, which is why you don't get that kind of angry response to often, I suspect.
I genuinely think that you wonderful guys might be a little close to the problem because you are so familiar with the software.
Finally, every new student I have, currently about 600, sends me a mind map detailing their previous life experience. For every 20, of all ages, that send me a comprehensive map with a couple of "funny bits" that I have no idea how they achieved, just one matters about it not doing what he wants. These are people ranging from 13 to 78 I offer this as a perspective. For the comments made in the earlier post from that angry fellow.
Finally, as a balance, I spent my day building three new presentations, gathering data from all over the place into a series of mind maps, the combination of which will make me an awful amount of money over the next year or so. In the midst of all of these interesting challenges please don't forget that you guys are doing an amazing job, an incredible job, and you're allowing the rest of us to play with your toys for free. Not many people do that. It is a very noble thing that you are doing.
Peter Caruther said:
I second that! All that code & design a lot to keep organized and managed, noty least of all if you have day job or a life.
Peter,
I'm getting my thoughts together but -- what version are you using? I assume your students use the same version? I am using 1.5.14 but here, the map opens fine in 1.5.13 (current stable version I just downloaded and installed).
Thanks.
Ken,
Using 1.5 .13 on the Mac. I have attached images, and hit the "Send" button to submit the breakdown.
Peter, for me it looks rather like the map could not be downloaded right. Could you please send me your copy per e-mail?
Regards, Dimitry
I wonder if the point Peter is making here relates to the old "GPF" error message that Microoft code preoduceed? "General Ptection Fault at ..." might of been of great use to programmers debuggin application code that did not conform to the recomendations Microsoft put ut, but it annoyed users and eventually the PTB@microsoft had it removed.
Just sayin' ....
Could someone look at the existing freeplane tutorial and think about whether it should be reworked of rather checked, corrected or just shortified and if there are essential gaps there?
If it is too long to be read let us just make it so short that checking the remaining part is not a big deal any more?
I was told that Peter is going to produce some videos. And Jonas (from Brazil, also not a native speaker either) was also going to do so.
Would it make sense to develop a plan to synchronize all the efforts?
I think I was not clear enough in my intention. I would love to have a documentation in a form Ken has proposed. After reading posts from Peter I am just not sure if it is a real problem for the beginners and also if how much effort should be put there. For me writing documentation always is a significant effort. Therefore I wanted to ask once again if yuo and particularly Ken are thinking it is the right thing to do.
I will try and post a short video on the subject in the next 48 hours, just the "start-up" for some using it for the first time. It takes a little thought to work out what should be left out!
Personally I think that, for new users, it is better to have a normal, linear, pdf-like user's manual.
Doing so allows for explaining basic features / usages first (at the first pages of the document). After the user gains some experiences with Freeplane, he / she can continue reading later pages.
On the other hand, if we used a mindmap to explain Freeplane features, I think some users might feel frustrated because they wouldn't know where to start reading or what to do when they first open the map.
Just my 2 cents.
Most users (I guess almost all) just try to use new programs without reading a manual. Only if that fails they might possibly search for a manual (but most will uninstall the program).
So I think we have to present them the essential information they need on the map they get presented when they open Freeplane for the very first time. We could copy from other mind mapping apps and start with a basic map containing only 5 to 10 nodes. (The whole content must fit onto every imaginable first window size.)
One of these nodes should teach the user to open a link to a introductory video.
Another link could lead to a manual. I agree with Robert that a linear manual could be better than another map.
The initial map could be kind of a tutorial by teaching the user to unfold nodes where more information can be found for slightly advanced users.
If the Freeplane installation is an upgrade then users might prefer the new features map that we have.
Regards
Volker
I am a bit provocative here, but I really want to ask you one question: If we have the probably most powerful tool for information sharing why should we use all other ways like pdf or videos first? Shouldn't we eat our own dog food?
In my first ever contact with Freemind about 15 years ago I knew nothing about mind mapping. So the FreeMind documentation map was not just an application manual but also the ultimative example of a mind map and the proof demonstrating how the information can be structured. It convinced me and you know the rest.
Dimitry, you are totally right.
+1
On 08/10/2016 04:59 AM, "Volker Börchers" wrote:
In a previous post I did ask Jeff Langston if he had ever used a mindmap before.
At this point in this thread I think we need to differentiate between people who
have NEVER EVER used a mindmap or similar graphic tool and do need the basics,
and those that have used some other mindmap and need to know what makes FP
individual, the menus, the hot keys, what the options do.
As for the "never" group, in my experience there are those who have learnt in
the past such things Excel where you can click to 'unfold'/'fold' a group of
lines or in a hierarchical file manager where you can click to 'unfold'/'fold'
part of the file system tree; some of those people understand the principle and
can easily extend that 'unfold'/'fold' concept to other settings. Some people,
in my experience, don't see the patterns and cues. I'd not that this has
nothing to do with other aspects of intelligence; we learn in different ways.
The left-brain/right-brain concept may have been discredited but the idea that
some people are text oriented, some image oriented, some number oriented seems
to hold.
I started with mindmaps on blackboards and flip charts in the early 1970s;
having a computer 'whiteboard' that was indefinitely extensible and where you
could 'hide' details by collapsing a node just as I could with spreadsheet rows
in Excel was wonderful! So wonderful that I could forgive any other UI bumps.
It was only as products evolved and I became more experienced did I become more
critical.
Just like there are some people who can work on any engine, any piece of
machinery with no formal education and no manual (but aren't autistic enough to
be called 'idiot savants') I seem to be able to pick up and use all the software
I've ever met. Its not all been to my liking for a variety of reasons, but I
could never write the kind of review Jeff did. I might criticise UI and display
aesthetics, engineering aesthetics, marketing aesthetics, but they could all get
a response of "Well, that's your opinion and everyone's entitled to his
opinion". Jeff gave a detailed and REDUCTIONIST critique. Such things have
nothing to do with the aesthetics of production, be it staff, in any form, nor
the value or suitability of the product.
Its pretty axiomatic in the computer & software industry that if you draw a Venn
diagram of the developers, the instrumentalists and the marketing there is very
little if any overlap. What is more surprising to many is that journalist and
reviewers don't even appear on the same chart.
--
It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from
falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the
government from falling into error.
--Robert H. Jackson, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1950
Being a text type person I can undestand your sentiments.
But I disagree for a number of reasons.
A Well Designed mindmap can, to people who are willing to accomodate visual navigation and read the labels and not be overwhelmed by rococo and/or Victorian curlicules and decorations, allow faster, more immediate access than wading though pages of linear text. (Its one reason I don't like the 'organic' style of Peter Bunyan's mindmaps.)
For example, I've reduced a 8-page resume to a single, easily comprehensible mindmap
I've reduced a 23 page powerpoint presentation to a single, easily comprehesible mindmap.
But the issue is "easily comprehesaible" to who?
I've met recruiters 20, 30 years younger than myself, who did not comprehend the idea of a resume on a web site where you clicked to a new page for each historic job or the skills ummary or cross linking between them. Their minds were locked in to paper copy for resumes. These same people were quite happy with Facebook and Twitter. Talk about compartmentalization!
To me, the "solution" Robertonisola seems hinting at is a WIKI rather than a PDF, something where, like a mindmap, the user can drill down for futher detail if he wants. Thanks to Wikipedia most people out there are familiar with navigating a wiki and its easy enough to set it up with a feedback section and have a small group who are authorized to revise it.
Hey, doen't Sourceforge support a wiki mechanism for its groups?
Oisín Mac Fhearaí, in my view Freeplane can be used as impressive tool for knowledge representation. Recently Quinbus has shared one impressive example at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kkv4tly0j4v086b/AABNmC4ESxRt8Nkk8blFI25Ha?dl=0 . You need to download the whole folder as a zip and to extract it locally because there are also image files needed ar right positions. Could you check it and tell us what you think?
Hi Oisín Mac Fhearaí.
What you say is true about the difficulty to understand how to go about someone elses mindmap. Wouldn't it be possible to map and give directions to move arround the mindmap? Map the Mindmap. To design and guide the reader in a route around the mindmap?
I started to use mindmaps and mindmap software not too long ago and what I had to struggle with my own map, was the initial layout of the map. Mindmaps where not very useful at first, and the content was not lacking. What was penalizing was how to navigate and put the information in meaningful way.
" meaningful way" is a term that can be very subjective, or is there a best practice to make a mind map easily readable? I think there is and not necessarily writing in a linear method.
Last edit: maggv 2016-08-11
I understand what you mean. (the instructions on how to read the instructions). No, I don't want that. But "milestones" that tell you what to do next. Connectors that tell you where to go next. I am just brainstorming now.