Issue 499 in moose-technology: Port & transmission in Mondrian

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Issue 499 in moose-technology: Port & transmission in Mondrian

moose-technology
Status: New
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium Component-Mondrian

New issue 499 by [hidden email]: Port & transmission in Mondrian
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=499

Hi Alex,

-=-=-=-=-=
Previous discussion:
What we did in Glamour was to attach to each Presentation a kind of default  
interaction. In your example, I would make #mouseEnter, #mouseClick ...  
default ports that are populated when the corresponding interactions happen  
on a graph element.

Then of course, these ports will belong to graph elements. Like this  
transmissions are created between the ports of a graph element. Perhaps  
there will also be a need to identify graph elements by name so that you  
can refer to them from outside the context of a script.

-=-=-=-=-=
Previous discussion:

Why not having ports that belong to an interaction instead? Consider the  
following script:
view nodes: (1 to: 1000).

Figure selection will imply a transmission between the root and each of  
these nodes. It could be a single transmission between 'root interaction'  
and the unique interaction of the nodes?

-=-=-=-=-=
Doru answer:
At least two reasons. First, the ports are not just for transmitting  
information, but ports also allow you to store arbitrary values that model  
the graph element, and thus you can model the state of a visualization  
(including side-effects). Second, using ports you will be able to let the  
shape populate ports by default without writing any explicit interaction  
(only write transmission when you want to deal with them).

Now, about we can be smart about transmissions and do what we do for  
shapes: we share the object between multiple graph elements. For this, we  
will just need a lookup of the origins instead of hardcoding them. Actually  
in Glamour, we have:

GLMTransmission>>originatesAt: aPort

and thus, you can have a smart transmission that performs a more complex  
check by checking if the port is part of any elements from a collection.  
Like this you will have only one the transmission object. You could write:

view nodes: #(1 2 3) labeled: #interestingNodes.
view nodes: #(5 6 7) labeled: #otherNodes.
view transmitTo: #otherNodes fromAny: #interestingNodes port: #selection.

Cheers,
Doru


_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Issue 499 in moose-technology: Port & transmission in Mondrian

moose-technology
Updates:
        Labels: -Type-Defect Type-Enhancement

Comment #1 on issue 499 by [hidden email]: Port & transmission in  
Mondrian
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=499

(No comment was entered for this change.)

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Issue 499 in moose-technology: Port & transmission in Mondrian

moose-technology
Updates:
        Status: WontFix

Comment #2 on issue 499 by [hidden email]: Port & transmission in  
Mondrian
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=499

I close this one, I have no plan to work on it so far. Roassal will provide  
a much nicer interaction mechanism than what Mondrian offers.

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev