search

srophe / srophe-eXist-app

DEPRECATED eXist code for Syriaca.org: The Syriac Reference Portal
GNU General Public License v3.0
10 stars 11 forks source link

Visualization of Relationships in NHSL #918

Closed davidamichelson closed 7 years ago

davidamichelson commented 7 years ago

For work records, please use http://syriaca.org/place/139.html as a model.

Specifically:

  1. Work to Work relationships will be listed in the main column (in the identity box?).

  2. Work to other entity relationships will be listed in the right column but with better labels and abbreviations. The labels will be drawn from the ODD file.

nathangibson commented 7 years ago

@wsalesky 2 questions:

  1. Do you need these labels as verbs? Participles? E.g., "This work commemorates 3 persons." Or "3 persons are commemorated in this work." Or simply "3 persons commemorated"? Trying to figure out if we need different labels for singular/plural/active/passive.
  2. Will this affect NHSL only or also other modules like SBD? I'm asking b/c I think relations consistently use @ref in NHSL but may use @name in SBD.
wsalesky commented 7 years ago

It does not matter to me what form is used as long as it is consistent. I can programmatically handle singular and plural.

It would be nice to use this across all modules (except places).

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 4, 2017, at 2:46 PM, nathangibson notifications@github.com wrote:

@wsalesky 2 questions:

Do you need these labels as verbs? Participles? E.g., "This work commemorates 3 persons." Or "3 persons are commemorated in this work." Or simply "3 persons commemorated"? Trying to figure out if we need different labels for singular/plural/active/passive. Will this affect NHSL only or also other modules like SBD? I'm asking b/c I think relations consistently use @ref in NHSL but may use @name in SBD. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

nathangibson commented 7 years ago

OK, try this on for size: https://github.com/srophe/srophe-eXist-app/blob/dev/srophe-app/documentation/syriaca-tei-main.odd#L775. @ref value is in the @ident and the gloss is designed to be a singular verb connecting the @active and the @passive of the relation. So you could construct a sentence, e.g., "This work commemorates 3 persons".

I will need to update some data in persons before it will work there (https://github.com/srophe/srophe-app-data/issues/676). I assume this would not affect SPEAR, right?

wsalesky commented 7 years ago

@nathangibson Remember when I said it didn't matter if you used the xml extension... well, turns out it does. Can we save the odd file as .xml?

wsalesky commented 7 years ago

I have added the new relationships view... let me know what you all think, I'm on the fence, even though I suggested the shortened view.

Example record: http://wwwb.library.vanderbilt.edu/work/792

nathangibson commented 7 years ago

As far as the odd file, we could save it as XML. There are a couple issues to consider.

  1. The reason I asked to switch it to .odd is so that the TEI plugin in Oxygen recognizes it and makes available the RNG/RNC conversion options. Perhaps I could set up the same transformation scenarios manually for .xml files? Or we could keep it as .xml and rename it to do the conversion?

  2. Will other projects recognize our ODD file as easily if it's .xml instead of .odd? I suppose if we link to it in appropriate places it shouldn't be a problem, right?

If you don't think either of these are problems, feel free to rename it .xml.

nathangibson commented 7 years ago

On relationships view, my personal opinion ...

I like having the sentence text with the number. ("This work commemorates 1 person.") I'm not sure I like hiding the related entities unless there's a long list of them. When they are hidden, it looks rather bare and it doesn't spark people's curiosity. However, with them expanded, it does look a bit cluttered or undefined.

Possible solutions:

  1. Make sentence summaries more like a subheader or in some way make them more prominent than the entity descriptions.
  2. Shorten the entity descriptions so they are only a linked headword (not type/series, alternate names, URI).

I'm just brainstorming -- the others should weigh in.

wsalesky commented 7 years ago

RE: ODD, let me see if I can do it programatically. eXist is storing it as a binary file, based on extension I guess, I wonder if I could force it to save it as an xml file.

wsalesky commented 7 years ago

Okay, it took some wrangling but I can parse the file as is. No need to save as '.xml'

wsalesky commented 7 years ago

Here is a revised version: http://wwwb.library.vanderbilt.edu/work/792

Uses the constructed sentence and shows the first two hits. More then two are hidden with the toggle button. I think the indenting helps with the visual separation.

jsaintlauren commented 7 years ago

I like that!

On Monday, January 16, 2017, Winona Salesky notifications@github.com wrote:

Here is a revised version: http://wwwb.library.vanderbilt.edu/work/792

Uses the constructed sentence and shows the first two hits. More then two are hidden with the toggle button. I think the indenting helps with the visual separation.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/srophe/srophe-eXist-app/issues/918#issuecomment-272878903, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEY0lD9aRF8WK7ar9Iv4ltpDtLlmMH_kks5rS4CrgaJpZM4La3t0 .

-- Sent by my large poodle - please excuse typos

nathangibson commented 7 years ago

I think this is the best version yet!

wsalesky commented 7 years ago

Okay, I think I will close this issue. @nathangibson is this dev only?

nathangibson commented 7 years ago

As far as dev, perhaps we should ask that at the next meeting.