Colloquium at Stanford
The Unfinished Revolution

Memorandum


Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 15:38:30 -0800

From: Eric Armstrong Reply-To: unrev-II@onelist.com

To: unrev-II@onelist.com

Subject:   DKR/OHS: 5 Authoring Requirements


Jack Park wrote Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 11:29:30 -0800

From: Eric Armstrong Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 16:21:35 -0800

TBD: Should node types be pre-defined? If they are, it prevents one person from specifying "Design Idea" while another specifies "Design Note" or "Design Topic". Without that regularity, it becomes impossible to ensure that a query has accessed all the relevant information. On the other hand, on-going investigations into "wicked problems" may need to organize as they go. So it may be best to allow node-type creation on the fly.

It would seem to be prudent, here, to give thought to all the efforts to build an ontology for the web. The underlying notion seems to be that without a consistent ontology, the web might just grow into an unsearchable maze of information. With one, the web might become a gigantic knowledge base.

I would suggest that the design process, in every instance possible, look to the idea of an interlingua, a common ontology on which all users can base their actions. Creating node types on the fly, IMHO, flies against the winds of usability.

Just my 0.02 euros Jack Park

Must be inflation. That sure as heck looks like a dollar's worth. Your logic appears immpeccable to me.

Follow up questions:

Sincerely,


Eric Armstrong