h a l f b a k e r yTrying to contain nuts.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I can't think of any kind of data that can't be represented as a tree. Even modern relational database tables are symmetrical trees.
A lot of menus on modern applications are arranged in trees. The windows registry is a tree. My proposal is for an interface that represents all of an application's
data as a tree. Forget about what window or tab or button that you have to get to to view or modify data. You now have an abolute path to all data in an application.
If you wanted to get real crazy, you could show the entire computer system as a tree.
An example tree
http://www.clustan....ClusterDataTree.gif
This is just one example of a data tree [lawpoop, Apr 16 2005]
Windows registry screenshot
http://images.googl...safe%3Doff%26sa%3DN
Imagine one of these for all programs. [lawpoop, Apr 16 2005]
Concept Maps
http://users.edte.u...lanzing/cm_home.htm
"Concepts and sometimes links are labeled. Links can be non-, uni- or bi-directional. Concepts and links may be categorised, they can be simply associative, specified or divided in categories such as causal or temporal relations." [reensure, Apr 16 2005]
CMap Tools
http://cmap.ihmc.us/
To answer, "How are concept maps browsable?" [reensure, Apr 16 2005]
[link]
|
| |
Although I'm not totally positive I understand what you're getting at, I think I get it and it sounds pretty baked to me. I can't name anything specific off the top of my head, but LOTS of applications use a tree-based interface. Some prime examples of this are Linux networking configurators, and a program I once used years ago to create one of those press-4-to-speak-to-nobody type automated phone systems. |
|
| |
You have tuned into what I'm getting at, but this is supposed to be *comprehensive*. Meaning, there shouldn't be anything left out. |
|
| |
Current applications have a mis-mash of menus, trees, windows, tabs, buttons, fields, dialogue boxes, wizards, etc. You can go nuts trying to find or remember where a particular setting is. Sometimes settings are left out! |
|
| |
With a comprehensive tree, all the data is in there. |
|
| |
I don't get it. Illustrate. |
|
| |
Have you browsed the windows registry with 'regedit'? That's basically what I'm talking about. All data in any program can be arranged hierarchically, and that arrangement is called a tree. |
|
| |
OK. Utterly baked. For example, in regedit. |
|
| |
This still sounds like an interface that's already popular to me. |
|
| |
Regedit is not comprehensive. It only applies to the windows registry. |
|
| |
Trees are not very popular interfaces. What common desktop apps have you seen a *comprehensive* tree (I'm not talking about the trees in the various title bar menus -- note that this idea is a *comprehensive* tree) |
|
| |
I understand where you're coming from [lawpoop] but I have trouble with the concept of a tree as "comprehensive", insofar as tree elements could be (but are not generally) displayed as decision endpoints. Seeing where files, or even their calls (e.g., Windows™ Shortcuts), are placed into a tree does little to enlighten me beyond what I see when looking at a file folder view in Windows™ Explorer. |
|
| |
I find that concept maps are more illuminating and they may be made to layer effectively in order to explore their hierarchy as well as their order. I have linked to a resource site for concept maps. |
|
| |