tonja
Hi,

here the fresh PBZIP and JPG for:

http://forums.thebrain.com/post/show_single_post?pid=41050292&postcount=1

which get lost.

Greetings,




Click image for larger version - Name: SAP.CH-0137.jpg, Views: 474, Size: 134.56 KB
Quote
zenrain
Sorry, I did look but unfortunately English and French are the only languages I know, so I'm pretty much lost. Hopefully someone else can provide help.
Windows 7
J-1.6.0_22
--
OSX 10.6.3
Java SE 6
Quote
tonja
Hi zenrain,

that's the point, if you went in an foreign restraurant you will see that the caculation will be done in the native language.

Many times it is similar if you like to share PB's global.

So it would be a nice feature to, that all thoghts (keywords, kategories, notes and links would be able to tranlate. So it would be easy to publish an existing PB in a new language or even to switch between languages.

But even this mini-PB will be easy to translate with any Google or Babylon tool, by myself I use trueterm.

The glue is that you have 2 different point of view to the world (better three, also the smart guys, which think in the mixed mode). But here you see the simple model that one group say YES to an argument (it is possible to understand the world) and the other group say NO (the third would say, it depends).

But the maindisscussion is about the topology. There are much more thinking-styles (more than a dozend), so this model would be very crowed.

How it is possible to put the thoughts on layers (like an paining program) an so I can switch on and off some or more layers. So I will see the argruments and the thinkingstyle (like the Philomat).

Greetings,

Quote
tonja
Hi zenrain,

that's the point, if you went in an foreign restraurant you will see that the caculation will be done in the native language.

Many times it is similar if you like to share PB's global.

So it would be a nice feature to, that all thoghts (keywords, kategories, notes and links would be able to tranlate. So it would be easy to publish an existing PB in a new language or even to switch between languages.

But even this mini-PB will be easy to translate with any Google or Babylon tool, by myself I use trueterm.

The glue is that you have 2 different point of view to the world (better three, also the smart guys, which think in the mixed mode). But here you see the simple model that one group say YES to an argument (it is possible to understand the world) and the other group say NO (the third would say, it depends).

But the maindisscussion is about the topology. There are much more thinking-styles (more than a dozend), so this model would be very crowed.

How it is possible to put the thoughts on layers (like an paining program) an so I can switch on and off some or more layers. So I will see the argruments and the thinkingstyle (like the Philomat).

Greetings,

Quote
Adathome

tonja wrote:
Hi zenrain,
The glue is that you have 2 different point of view to the world (better three, also the smart guys, which think in the mixed mode). But here you see the simple model that one group say YES to an argument (it is possible to understand the world) and the other group say NO (the third would say, it depends).

But the maindisscussion is about the topology. There are much more thinking-styles (more than a dozend), so this model would be very crowed.

How is it possible to put the thoughts on layers (like an paining program) an so I can switch on and off some or more layers. So I will see the arguments and the thinking-style (like the Philomat).

When you use for every group / thinking style. different link-types you have your layers, the only thing you need is a link-type filter in PB so you can switch a group of link-types on and off.

Change your little brain example with groups of link-types
- yes
- no
(- depends mixed yes+no, all links are visible )

See also the discussion in this thread
http://forums.thebrain.com/post?id=4807407&trail=15

See below two attached videos with Popper model examples (with TwoMore tool)
- link-type selection
- focus button active thought
Click image for larger version - Name: popper_frame_select_link-types.png, Views: 248, Size: 135.39 KB
Regards, Ad Divide knowledge = multiply knowledge (Windows 10 -  TB8 / TB9)
Quote
tonja
Hi Adathome,

wow looks great!

For the real layer look and feel it would be nice to simplify the world... So if you don't think like the "Wolkenliebhaber" than mostly you can also hide all the Wolkenliebhaber-Thoughts which are after the de-filtering not connected any more.
(Like a CAD Layer: watersupply, telecommunication, walls, etc.)

But you look and feel is the "expert-mode" where you get guided to new "thinking-styles" that there is something hidden around...

Where I can get the ByteMe "TwoMore" tool visualisation tool?

With this Link-Type-Filtering is a very good way to solve complex thinking in layers!

Greetings,


Quote
Adathome

tonja wrote:

Where I can get the ByteMe "TwoMore" tool visualisation tool?

See this thread, page 2, contribute from Alan Rhodes (July 31, 2010 at 03:14 AM)
http://forums.thebrain.com/post?id=4807407&trail=15

A better solution is when this kind of link-type filter is available in PB and you don't have to search for other software.
so give your 3 votes on usersvoice:

http://thebrain.uservoice.com/forums/4597-thebrain/suggestions/74550-more-advanced-link-types?ref=title
http://thebrain.uservoice.com/forums/4597-thebrain/suggestions/83489-typed-links-have-a-direction?ref=title

Regards, Ad Divide knowledge = multiply knowledge (Windows 10 -  TB8 / TB9)
Quote
jostber
A link type filter would be great. As links already have their own attribute in the thought's xml code, this should be possible to implement without much changes.

<Links>
        <Link>
            <guid>77E1FA20-7F06-A246-8076-94A53A0C28AF</guid>
            <idA>D14D951C-FF80-1C5C-37EA-EC6B9667C8BF</idA>
            <idB>031FEDB5-1678-C556-AFF0-DBA60C6F6434</idB>
            <dir>1</dir>
            <name></name>
            <labelForward></labelForward>
            <labelBackward></labelBackward>
            <creationDateTime>2010-08-19 12:42:03.457</creationDateTime>
            <modificationDateTime>2010-08-19 12:42:03.457</modificationDateTime>
            <isType>0</isType>
            <color>0</color>
            <thickness>0</thickness>
            <meaning>0</meaning>
            <linkTypeID></linkTypeID>
        </Link>
    </Links>
TheBrain 8.0.2.2 Slackware 14.2 KDE 4.10.3 Java 1.8 / (Windows 7)
Quote
rhodes

I'm a bit puzzled by what you mean by a "link type filter". Neither of the two UserVoice threads Ad posted mention this specifically, although I agree with their general aim, which is for us to have more advanced link features.

My interpretation of this is that you would like to be able to search for a particular link type by using the Reports filter to display only Thoughts at which a link of a particular type terminates. Is that correct? I too would like a proper way to group links by type. In such a case, there would have to be some way of halving the number of results displayed, since a link connects two thoughts. We must remember that Reports cannot filter for links directly, only for the Thoughts at either end.

Since, as jostber demonstates, "links already have their own attribute in the thought's xml code", this should not be too difficult to achieve.

Alan Rhodes
Quote
Adathome
rhodes wrote:

I'm a bit puzzled by what you mean by a "link type filter". Neither of the two UserVoice threads Ad posted mention this specifically, although I agree with their general aim, which is for us to have more advanced link features.

See this old post from Harlan

                                       
  
March 12, 2007 at 11:38 AM


Andy, is the way that Wouter describes hiding links by type the kind of functionality that you are looking for?

 

Wouter, this type of link filtering is planned as an extension to the current filtering capabilities. Where now you can filter by date last accessed, we plan to add the ability to filter by thought type and by link type.


__________________
Regards,
-Harlan

and this old thread
http://forums.thebrain.com/post?id=2163592
Regards, Ad Divide knowledge = multiply knowledge (Windows 10 -  TB8 / TB9)
Quote
rhodes
Thanks, Ad, that's encouraging to read!
Alan Rhodes
Quote
tonja
Hi,

sounds great that thought and link-objects get similar operations like filtering!

Layer?
(The link-filtering, is only a wouraround of "virtual layers"...)
Funny would be that PB has different layers. If you work only with one, you will have the same look and feel like today.
If the user is interessted to work with many, he/she can distribute the thoughts on different layers and the links can be inside one layer or connect thoughts between layers (the best ideas overlive and are also useful in a new context = layer).

Example:

Layer 0:   Home
Layer 1:   Topics
Layer 2:   Arguments of the "Watch Thinkers"
Layer 3:   Arguments of the "Sky Lovers"
Layer 4:   Arguments of the Core Hippy Community Summer of Love 1967 in San Fransisco
Layer 5:  Arguments of the Millions of Hippy Followers
Layer 6: Arguments of the Reagan-Administration 1967
Layer 7: Arguments of the Neo Hippies ("Apple-Generation living from the dad´s credit cards")

Some ot the thoughts may have connections between the believes and thinking-styles - other are in contrast:
Link Type:
Yes, I agree!
No, I´m against!
I have no opionion...
No comment!

Now with filtering on thoughts, link-types or switching on/off different (or many levels) - it should be possible to get deeper insides in the dynamic of
thinking in a society (Not everybody loves LSD!).

Greetings,







Quote
rhodes

Some web page editors and image editors enable the user to select into which vertical layer (the Z-plane) an object will go, and thus show or hide the object by "bringing it to the front" or "moving it back".

However, layers are really just an interface concept created by the programmer. PB only has checkboxes in Preferences for showing or hiding a particular feature. I like your suggestion of adding "layers" to PB so that users can customize which layer they wish to use as the current display, which objects belong to that layer, and which don't. It follows that any given object can be visible in one or more layers.

E.g., in Normal view > Expand all, the space between thoughts at the top level might be filled by thought labels in one layer, link labels in the next, etc. The active thought and its immediate relatives would belong to all layers, i.e., always be visible.

Alan Rhodes
Quote
tonja

Hi Alan Rhodes,

Any object should belong to one specifpic layer, eg. O1-L1, O2-L2....

The links could be in one layer Link-O11_to_O12 and Link-O12_to_O13, 

or an interconnection between different layers L1 to L2 like:

Link-O11_to_O21 where O11 is on layer L1 and O21 is on L2. 

Short a layer is only an new (unique) attribute of an object (= Thought), and the defaultlayer has the ID = 0 (Home-Layer).

You can define as many layers as you want, only the home-layer is mandatory all others are optional.

Now with tick-boxes you can switch on/off one or more layers. At least you must choose one, if you don't select one, so you will see layer L0.

For example I can show the layers:

L0, L21, L53

or

L45

or 

L67, L66

if I like... or better need to analyse this point of view.

Superfeature: 

If I use the expert mode (for example I can switch this on in the customizing properties), I can see not only the selected layers - even I see the "link-ports" to other layers!

E.g.

I want to see my layers:

L0, L21, L53

with the objects (=Thoughts):

O0.1, O0.2 on layer L0

O21.1

O53.1

and aditional I see that O53.1 has and link-port to L66 and L65!

LP1(O53.1.L66)

LP2(O53.1.L65)

For visualisation reasons I would put the list of layers on the left side of the plain and make a different colorcoding between active/inactive layers (e.g. like 3D push buttons on/off or whatever). So the link-ports-connections to this list can be switched on and of. So I get animated to switch my viewpoint. E.g. I "live my thinking-live in layer3, L3" and I browsing around and run in object O3.1 and I now see that "my" thought is an very old one, which is the same like in this case of the antique thinking in layer L698. Now if I follow this link (expand L698), at first I see my connection to this layer, this means the connections from O3.1 to O698.34 with an link-type "like diogenes" (which I can define).

So I see that my thinking belongs in some cases on different layers, it depends on the topic, or party or hidden interests, whatefer.

 Thanks and Regards,


P.S. It it works well, I think it will be very intuitive to use - like on any painting-program (design-tool or webbrower-technology) - and gives lots of new insights with an holistic view of the world of thinking. 



 




Quote
rhodes

I really like your idea of having checkboxes for each thought that list which layers show that thought, and which hide it. It would be the answer to privacy and hiding, as long as the links to a thought are also hidden when the thought is not visible. Otherwise we would have links with no thought at their ends.

Maybe the Properties & Attachments pane could sport a new set of checkboxes where users could check Plex visibility, just as now in Tags. To take this idea one step further, attributes for visibility should be in the same league as Types and Tags. E.g., We should have a Layers list (maybe z-levels 1-9) with proper mass move functions in the Selection box, such as "Set Selection Layers". This would raise user privacy to new heights!

Alan Rhodes
Quote

Newsletter Signup  Newsletter        Visit TheBrain Blog   Blog       Follow us on Twitter   Twitter       Like Us on Facebook   Facebook         Watch Us on Youtube  YouTube       

TheBrain Mind Map & Mindmapping Software     Download TheBrain Mind Mapping Software