>> Anatoly Volynets wrote:What is "attaching UMO"? Is there any on the screen presented?
>>> Below is the same message as the previous one with few corrections.
>>> The UI presented looks like if we agreed that _any_ UMO can have as a
>>> child and be a child of _any_ UMO. For example a Problem can have a
>>> Course child. I conclude this because example presented contains DOT
>>> (Dialogue of Texts) as a child of Topic, while there initially were 3
>>> top level UMOs: Course, DOT and Through Problem. I don't actually mind,
>>> but am not sure that was meant to be so from technical point of view.
> Not exactly. The screen shows Edit UMO, and presents all the children that
> exist for this UMO. The attaching UMO is a diffrent story and would depend
> on UMO type. It would be added on this screen on the next iteration, and
> would not allow to attach incorrect UMO types. And DOT is another story
> because they contain references not children :)
It seems preferable to add UMO type in its name field instead of general
column titles. The reason #1: if there are a lot of children of one type
the type is missing and forces a viewer to run up to verify the type.
The reason #2: other titles are obvious, so the entire "Title line" just
fills some space in the end.
BTW, "Edit UMO" is quite functional as "Edit" in my view.
Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2001-2008