Basic set up questions for Map project

Yes. A note can have multiple aliases, in the same container or a different container.

Links. Links can connect any two objects (notes, aliases, etc.) except adornments. However, you can only see links fully drawn if both source and destination of the link are in the same map (i.e. children of the same outline container or agent). But, hyperbolic view (as illustrated above by @satikusala) will show all linked items (and only linked items) in a document, albeit laid out a different way.

So, yes, you can do as you ask.

I just checked and hover expressions are shown in Hyperbolic view. But, it might be good if they were. I’ve no idea what overhead if any that would mean, so I’ll leave that as a feature suggestion for someone else to make.

I think the table ideas is wonderful!!! In fact, it makes me thing that attribute browser and cross trabs (treemap and charts won’t help here) may be useful in this context. Note, we still need to/want to create the link so that we can create the associations and passes data back and forth between the notes.

Looks like you can do some interesting things with the attribute browser too:

Crosstabs also shows an interesting view:

Here is the sample file I’ve been playing with. You can check out the link actions and rules that keep the data updated.

TBX L - Visual Mapping.tbx (99.8 KB)

1 Like

If visible links are important, consider using map adornments rather than containers for your groupings.

1 Like

@mwra, this could work for a file of say 20~30 notes IMO, as noted by @eastgate, but if you start getting into more than than than this solution simply won’t scale. Personally, I think the right answer is the hyperbolic view as this flattens the containers and allows for link analysis, but the current implementation of hyperbolic view has limitations that would make the effort difficult today…we’ll need to wait for a future update.

That’s very generous of you, and I greatly appreciate that. Unfortunately, I’m traveling now so that might not be possible. But I greatly appreciate your offer. Let me see if one of my associates can help facilitate this. In the meantime, I’ll response to your other posts.

This is interesting… passing data back and forth between [linked] notes. I will need to view your linking with TB video.

Quite so, but I’m mindful of some recent push-back about rushing to apply scale limitations. I think 20-30 notes is perhaps rather a low estimate. The real limit is not fixed: it’s a mix of screen size and how much complexity is being built into the ‘map’.

I’d agree hyperbolic view holds promise re links but it may not help in terms of visualising the groupings as in the OPs sketch. The diagram doesn’t neatly translate into any view, but with some adjustment can be accommodated. The questions is which elements of the diagram to adjust to fit it to a view.

Regardless, for a known number of groupings a person’s role could be stored in a discrete attribute per group giving easily access info to use however most suitable for any given view.

I think the problematic design aspect is the visualising the groups/titles at the same time.

In the context of this project, I’m trying to establish the recurrent presence of key actors (people) within certain groups, organizations, and businesses. Those key actors are represented in TBX notes. So, my reference to note-aliases refers to their recurrent presence groups, organizations, and businesses. Please let me know if you’d like me further clarify.

In the context of the Map or Hyperbole views, I was thinking of it as way to glance at a note’s text, and perhaps some of its values.

Thank you. I think perhaps I’ve been framing my visual understanding of what’s possible/not possible in Maps view, which doesn’t seem to allow links to traverse between notes in different containers. Or at least that’s been my experience (though it has been limited). I don’t have much experience with Hyperbolic view, as it seems like a relatively new feature – and I’ve mostly used the Outline view in TBX.

I assume you meant to write that they are NOT available in Hyperbolic view, correct? If so, that’s problematic – but not insurmountable for this particular project. Is there any kind of alternative feature that roughly accomplishes what I’m seeking, as far as revealing some of a note’s content within that view?

I appreciate the concerns regarding scale and complexity. I don’t expect that the project I’m working on will become too complex in the short run. But I have been thinking about how it could grow, and become more complex and difficult to scale.

I’m not sure what to do about that at this stage, and how it should inform how I’m structuring the data in the Outline view, i.e., through assembling prototypes, containers, and filling in notes and aliases into these containers. Should I hold off on that work or reconsider how my organizational structure before I get too far along?

Thank you. I am quite happy to consider a different structure or design. For now, I’m trying to show colleagues how there are emerging patterns of the recurrent presence of key actors (people) within certain groups, organizations, and businesses. (Sorry to repeat myself.) It seems to me that my researcher-colleagues would be able to understand this visually with links connecting to notes with the names of these people.

Thank you. I’m trying to imagine how this work mechanically, and how it might be represented visually. Would you mind providing some more detail? Thank you.

Just realized that I failed to reply to this question. I was just providing a broad categories; the more precise ones include: Law Firms, LLCs, PACs, Consultant Groups, Non-Profit Groups, Advocacy Groups.

I’m afraid my travel will make a phone discussion difficult this week, though I very much appreciate your generous offer. Is there another way we can communicate further, so that we can resolve how I ought to set up prototypes – and what else I should to to structure the TBX project? Thank you very much.

Also see my supplied TBX demo, it is built in there.

1 Like

I see…I would you an attribute to make this distinction. One prototype, pEntity, and the attribute that can be used to distinguish them. This will help with analytics down the road, and we can automate linking.

It does, this is why there is a little according to going in and out of the top of the notes in map view. It is just not what you’re expecting.

Perhaps…but probably note. The nice thing with Tinderbox is that allows for your model to change over time.

I assume you mean that I should make one prototype per entity, correct? That’s basically what I was planning to do. But I’m not quite should what kinds of attributes I should include for these distinct entities. Do you have some suggestions?

Perhaps the problem was that I first attempted to create these links in Maps view, and should’ve been creating them in Outline view. Within Maps view, it didn’t seem I was able to create links between notes (aliases) that were in containers. Perhaps I didn’t know how to execute it properly – or was just overlooking basic features.

Understood. I suppose I was just hoping to put together a basic structure that can evolve over time, provided I set up the basic elements properly.

NO!!! One prototype: pEntity. You’ll then use an attribute, e.g. $Type that will contain the value of the type of entity that it is.

Nope…where you create the link makes no difference functionally, although I do see how the UI was unexpected for you. The challenge you’re running into is map view shows containers, i.e., is not flat (by design).

Yup, that is exactly what we’re doing here…see my supplied demo. Here is something to remember, there is five stages to this type of knowledge management: collection, curation, creation, contributions, and collaboration. You’re starting with the output contribution stage as a vision, which is good, but don’t let the output hang you up with what you can do in the other stages. We may find that for your presentation there may be another or different tool to make our contribution super pretty, but what I’ve found is the make pretty software does a lousy jog with the earlier stages of the process. Tinderbox is AMAZING for these earlier stages, and in the contribution, but this may take some learning.

1 Like