Re: specs etc

[Anatoly Volynets <av@total-knowledge.com>]

Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:

> Anatoly Volynets wrote:
>  
>
> > Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > > > Now I realise it is not enough. Another object has to be accessed
> > > > > either sequantially, or conditionally, or jumped to, or in cycle.
> > > > >    
> > > > >          
> > > It will still be expressed as relationship between objects, not a
> > > separate object,
> > > even if it's more complex then what I described.
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > I actually don't care wether it is an object, or a system fuction. It
> > must work, that's it. What made me think about the object to organize
> > flow of other objects is that such a thing (a work-flow in any form)
> > can be of separate interest for authors and teachers. If it is, then
> > shareability will be a problem for a system function to compare with
> > an object, right?
> >    
> Try to think about it from this angle: how will you represent "workflow"
> as an object? i.e.
> _what_ is shareable there? Just think of workflow re-use UI.
>  

Well, I can clearly imagine it! Say, it is a flow-chart made by another 
guy. I am not really good in algorithmics, but see how perfectly my type 
of problems fit in this work-flow. I take the flow-chart and edit it, 
change problems adjusted to it. Why not? We know very well, that right 
algorithm is a problem in itself. It is specifically so when it comes 
to  organazing  knowledge in fields  of humanities.

Now, having said that, I do not insist on work-flow object. Can it work 
otherwise? - go ahead, implement it as you see it.

> > > > > What is "Dialog of texts"?
> > > > >          
> > > How will it be presented to an end-user? What is going to be so special
> > > about it?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > Right question! We need to specify it. Say, title, list of texts with
> > some related data (author, time , sourse...), and supposed links
> > between them. Links of different types: contradicts, develops, doubts,
> > complements.  Probably, smth. else.  Let's think together  for a
> > little while and I'll put it in specs in few days. All right?
> >    
> Well, when someone says dialog of texts, I think about multiple
> cross-links between them (i.e. statement a in
> paragraph b in text X contradicts statements m and n in text Y).
>
>  
OK, it is more developed idea now. Give me some more time to put it in 
specs.

--

Anatoly Volynets, Co-Founder
total-knowledge.com
culturedialogue.org