Talk:Discourse Modeling - Revision history

Karola: /* Day 2 */

2022-11-23T18:55:12Z

Day 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:55, 23 November 2022
Line 346:		Line 346:
	** wiki is a data entry tool		** wiki is a data entry tool
	** we still don't have relations		** we still don't have relations
	- but this is not so much a problem privately, only when we merge}}		** but this is not so much a problem privately, only when we merge}}
	- {{d\|id= goal \|a=KK \|type= claim \|text=KK: we're in a ~~serach~~ for conventions: how do we write anywhere in a discourse graph?}}		* {{d\|id= goal \|a=KK \|type= claim \|text=KK: we're in a search for conventions: how do we write anywhere in a discourse graph?}}
	- {{d\|id= goal \|a=KH \|type= claim \|text=our goal is to create Markdown for Discourse Graphs - a set of syntax conventions portable everywhere - we can extract and port to appropriate DB to query and viz later }}		* {{d\|id= goal \|a=KH \|type= claim \|text=our goal is to create Markdown for Discourse Graphs - a set of syntax conventions portable everywhere - we can extract and port to appropriate DB to query and viz later }}

Karola: add /* Day 2 */ discussion with DG annotations

2022-11-23T18:50:08Z

add Day 2: discussion with DG annotations

Karola at 18:44, 23 November 2022

2022-11-23T18:44:52Z

Show changes

Sj: experiments

2022-11-13T18:06:42Z

experiments

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 13 November 2022
Line 6:		Line 6:
	* KH: [[Konrad Hinsen]]		* KH: [[Konrad Hinsen]]

	== Section 1 KK ==		== Section 1 KK ==
	=== Squad goals: ===		=== Squad goals: ===
	==== Building Queries====		==== Building Queries====

Sj: extends

2022-11-13T18:06:13Z

extends

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 13 November 2022
Line 33:		Line 33:
	\|supports=}}		\|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id=survey-first \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=the first steps involved would be getting people together & doing a survey of prior work (eg anagora)\|supports=systems}}		** {{d\|id=survey-first \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=the first steps involved would be getting people together & doing a survey of prior work (eg anagora)\|supports=systems}}
	*** {{d\|id=how-to-extend \|a=? \|type=question \|text=how can we build on this and extend it?\|~~clarify~~=survey-first}}		*** {{d\|id=how-to-extend \|a=? \|type=question \|text=how can we build on this and extend it?\|extends=survey-first}}
	*** {{d\|id=long-term coord \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=this (federation) project is more of a long-term coordination, determining who is interested in doing what over the next few years\|supports=survey-first}}		*** {{d\|id=long-term coord \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=this (federation) project is more of a long-term coordination, determining who is interested in doing what over the next few years\|supports=survey-first}}
	*** {{d\|id=fed-as-in-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=federation as in federated wiki?\|~~clarify~~=survey-first}}		*** {{d\|id=fed-as-in-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=federation as in federated wiki?\|extends=survey-first}}

	<!--		<!--
Line 49:		Line 49:
	* {{d\|id=page-forking \|a=? \|type=question \|text=problem with wiki is that there is only one version of each page - what if you disagree? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=page-forking \|a=? \|type=question \|text=problem with wiki is that there is only one version of each page - what if you disagree? \|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id=fed-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=in wiki each page has a single version ==> federated wiki is the solution \|supports=page-forking}}		** {{d\|id=fed-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=in wiki each page has a single version ==> federated wiki is the solution \|supports=page-forking}}
	** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-git \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=pages in a federated wiki are more like working in branches as in git \|~~clarifies~~=fed-wiki}}		** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-git \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=pages in a federated wiki are more like working in branches as in git \|extends=fed-wiki}}
	*** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-merging \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=''branches'' and ''merges'' are important ideas in the federated wiki concept space \|supports=fed-wiki-git}}		*** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-merging \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=''branches'' and ''merges'' are important ideas in the federated wiki concept space \|supports=fed-wiki-git}}
	* {{d\|id=author-dgs \|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=we talk about DGs as if they are done by the reader of a paper, but at some point, authors will start out by creating DGs to which readers will respond. We should consider the reader ==> author transition \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=author-dgs \|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=we talk about DGs as if they are done by the reader of a paper, but at some point, authors will start out by creating DGs to which readers will respond. We should consider the reader ==> author transition \|supports=}}

Sj: opposes

2022-11-13T18:04:43Z

opposes

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:04, 13 November 2022
Line 148:		Line 148:
	*KH: [[proposal]] making tacit knowledge explicit!!		*KH: [[proposal]] making tacit knowledge explicit!!

	== Section 3 Kyle ==		== Section 3 Kyle ==
	* {{d\|id=start-w-schemas \|a= \|type=question \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=start-w-schemas \|a= \|type=question \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}

Sj: /* Section 3 Kyle */

2022-11-13T18:01:09Z

Section 3 Kyle

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:01, 13 November 2022
Line 149:		Line 149:

	== Section 3 Kyle ==		== Section 3 Kyle ==
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=~~claim~~ \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=start-w-schemas \|a= \|type=question \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=smw makes this hard for exactly this reason (deciding up front is friction). \|supports=}}		** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=smw makes this hard for exactly this reason (deciding up front is friction). \|supports=start-w-schemas}}
	** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=easier with free form mediawiki templates and wiki text \|supports=}}		** {{d\|id=simple-mw \|a= \|type=claim \|text=easier with free form mediawiki templates and wiki text \|supports=start-w-schemas}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=templates allow tiny Lua templates, w/ any number of fields and presentation. \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=templates allow tiny Lua templates, w/ any number of fields and presentation. \|supports=simple-mw}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=this can be edited flexibly, so schema changes don't break things or make them illegible. \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=this can be edited flexibly, so schema changes don't break things or make them illegible. \|supports=simple-mw}}

	** {{d\|id= \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=is there a problem extending from mw to smw later? \|~~supports~~=}}		** {{d\|id= \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=is there a problem extending from mw to smw later? \|extends=simple-mw}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=no, can start with a dozen schemas by hand, then decide if to move to a MW extension (smw or other) or wikidata \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=no, can start with a dozen schemas by hand, then decide if to move to a MW extension (smw or other) or wikidata \|supports=simple-mw}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=depends on what authoring + visualization tools we want, and the modelling tradeoffs we want \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=depends on what authoring + visualization tools we want, and the modelling tradeoffs we want \|supports=simple-mw}}

	* {{d\|id=template-start \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=should we start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=template-start \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=should we start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ? \|supports=}}

Sj: /* Section 3 Kyle */

2022-11-13T17:58:04Z

Section 3 Kyle

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:58, 13 November 2022
Line 163:		Line 163:
	* {{d\|id=edge-complexity \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=edge-complexity \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes? \|supports=}}
	* {{d\|id=when-done \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=how do we know when we are done? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=when-done \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=how do we know when we are done? \|supports=}}

			** {{d\|id=internal-consistency \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=we need to create an internally consistent way of sharing templates \|supports=template-start}}
			*** {{d\|id= \|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=challenge: templates are universally available, which means that anyone can break our template\|supports=internal-consistency}}

			* {{d\|id= \|a=KM \|type=question \|text=should we decompose Questions into further properties (like a Q has a subject and object) or leave it nat language?\|supports=}}
			** {{d\|id= \|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=we should stick to natural language \| source=self \|supports=}}

			* {{d\|id=wiki-granularity \|a=KH \|type=question \|text=if you represent a dg in a wiki, what is a page? what's the granularity? every source is a page? \|supports=}}
			** {{d\|id=wiki-all-pages \|a=KM \|type=claim \|text=it seems everything is a page. \|extends=wiki-granularity }}
			*** {{d\|id=wiki-sections \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=sections of a page are not a page. \|opposes=wiki-all-pages }}
			** {{d\|id=wiki-node-pages \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=everything we want to be a node should be a page. \|extends=wiki-granularity }}
			** {{d\|id=wiki-subgraph-pages \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=wiki transclusion also allows any subgraph to have a page, transcluding other nodes. \|extends=wiki-granularity }}
			*** {{d\|id=wiki-pages-busy \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text= then each page needs a title - lots of work. and makes the history view busy, a UX question affecting exploration. \|opposes=wiki-node-pages }}
			** {{d\|id=wiki-pages-manageable \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=True, this is a Q of interfaces. Wiki recent changes scales well, we don't need to worry about that yet. we can use wikibase to scale ux issues and hide certain types of history (eg source edits). But we can do it this way for a demo. \|opposes=wiki-pages-busy }}
			:: '''NB''': ''this last is really 'oppose in part, support in part'. speaking to wanting a vocabulary of connection types''
			*** {{d\|id=start-with-transclusion\|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=first attempt: everything is a page, we rely on transclusion to group things \|supports=wiki-pages-manageable}}
			** {{d\|id= \|a=KH \|type=question \|text=can we have the entire Q as a page title? \|extends=wiki-pages-busy }}

			* {{d\|id= \|a=KK \|type=claim \|text=there are many to many relationships between sources & evidence \|supports=}}
			* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=source property could be a url and we could create an entity for the source that scrapes data and populates fields. If you expect something will be used more than once you probably want it to have the full data\|supports=}}
			* {{d\|id=starting-dgs \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=let's identify a discussion we want to capture, and figure out how to name it. \|supports=}}

	<!--		<!--
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=\|supports=}}		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=\|supports=}}
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=\|supports=}}		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=\|supports=}}

	* - decision: start with naming & schemas first		* - decision: start with naming & schemas first
	* - do we start with a schema or refine as we go?		* - do we start with a schema or refine as we go?
Line 184:		Line 204:
	* - we can do this by hand - dozen schemas		* - we can do this by hand - dozen schemas
	* - we can then decide whether we want to do smw or use wikidata & their respective modelling tradeoffs		* - we can then decide whether we want to do smw or use wikidata & their respective modelling tradeoffs

	* - start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ?		* - start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ?
	* - kk: [[question]] will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes?		* - kk: [[question]] will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes?
	* - KK: how do we know when we are done?		* - KK: how do we know when we are done?
	~~-->~~

	* - SJ: need to create an internally consistent way of sharing templates		* - SJ: need to create an internally consistent way of sharing templates
	* - kH: templates are universally available, which means that anyone can break our template		* - kH: templates are universally available, which means that anyone can break our template
Line 212:		Line 229:
	* - sj: this gets to my interest, naming		* - sj: this gets to my interest, naming
	* - sj: a great next step would be intifying a discussion wewant to capture		* - sj: a great next step would be intifying a discussion wewant to capture
	*		-->

Sj at 17:28, 13 November 2022

2022-11-13T17:28:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:28, 13 November 2022
Line 85:		Line 85:
	**SJ: [[claim]] personal or group notetaking: connections are not discourse connections - they include refrences, clarifiers, and links of definitions		**SJ: [[claim]] personal or group notetaking: connections are not discourse connections - they include refrences, clarifiers, and links of definitions

	* {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text= \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text= \|supports=}}
	-->		-->

Line 149:		Line 149:

	== Section 3 Kyle ==		== Section 3 Kyle ==
	*		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}
			* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}
			** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=smw makes this hard for exactly this reason (deciding up front is friction). \|supports=}}
			** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=easier with free form mediawiki templates and wiki text \|supports=}}
			*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=templates allow tiny Lua templates, w/ any number of fields and presentation. \|supports=}}
			*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=this can be edited flexibly, so schema changes don't break things or make them illegible. \|supports=}}

			** {{d\|id= \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=is there a problem extending from mw to smw later? \|supports=}}
			*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=no, can start with a dozen schemas by hand, then decide if to move to a MW extension (smw or other) or wikidata \|supports=}}
			*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=depends on what authoring + visualization tools we want, and the modelling tradeoffs we want \|supports=}}

			* {{d\|id=template-start \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=should we start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ? \|supports=}}
			* {{d\|id=edge-complexity \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes? \|supports=}}
			* {{d\|id=when-done \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=how do we know when we are done? \|supports=}}

			<!--
			* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=\|supports=}}
			* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=\|supports=}}

	* - decision: start with naming & schemas first		* - decision: start with naming & schemas first
	* - do we start with a schema or refine as we go?		* - do we start with a schema or refine as we go?
Line 166:		Line 184:
	* - we can do this by hand - dozen schemas		* - we can do this by hand - dozen schemas
	* - we can then decide whether we want to do smw or use wikidata & their respective modelling tradeoffs		* - we can then decide whether we want to do smw or use wikidata & their respective modelling tradeoffs
	* - start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ?
			* - start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ?
	* - kk: [[question]] will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes?		* - kk: [[question]] will defining edges/relationships turn out to be more complicated than creating templates for nodes?
	* - KK: how do we know when we are done?		* - KK: how do we know when we are done?
			-->

	* - SJ: need to create an internally consistent way of sharing templates		* - SJ: need to create an internally consistent way of sharing templates
	* - kH: templates are universally available, which means that anyone can break our template		* - kH: templates are universally available, which means that anyone can break our template

Sj: /* Version control v Narratives */

2022-11-13T17:07:44Z

Version control v Narratives

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:07, 13 November 2022
Line 73:		Line 73:
	* {{d\|id=what-dg-types \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what types of graph are we talking about? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=what-dg-types \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what types of graph are we talking about? \|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id=lacking-meta-dgs \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=I haven't seen dgs about discourse: chains of reasoning, mapping out arguments - these can be linear if there is a dialog \|supports=what-dg-types}}		** {{d\|id=lacking-meta-dgs \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=I haven't seen dgs about discourse: chains of reasoning, mapping out arguments - these can be linear if there is a dialog \|supports=what-dg-types}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what does composite graph of discourse addressing the same issues look like? \|extends=lacking-meta-dgs}}		*** {{d\|id=composite-dg \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what does composite graph of discourse addressing the same issues look like? \|extends=lacking-meta-dgs}}
	** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=personal or group notetaking: connections are not discourse connections - they include refrences, clarifiers, and links of definitions \|supports=what-dg-types}}		** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=personal or group notetaking: connections are not discourse connections - they include refrences, clarifiers, and links of definitions \|supports=what-dg-types}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:06, 13 November 2022
Line 33:		Line 33:
	\|supports=}}		\|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id=survey-first \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=the first steps involved would be getting people together & doing a survey of prior work (eg anagora)\|supports=systems}}		** {{d\|id=survey-first \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=the first steps involved would be getting people together & doing a survey of prior work (eg anagora)\|supports=systems}}
	*** {{d\|id=how-to-extend \|a=? \|type=question \|text=how can we build on this and extend it?\|~~clarify~~=survey-first}}		*** {{d\|id=how-to-extend \|a=? \|type=question \|text=how can we build on this and extend it?\|extends=survey-first}}
	*** {{d\|id=long-term coord \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=this (federation) project is more of a long-term coordination, determining who is interested in doing what over the next few years\|supports=survey-first}}		*** {{d\|id=long-term coord \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=this (federation) project is more of a long-term coordination, determining who is interested in doing what over the next few years\|supports=survey-first}}
	*** {{d\|id=fed-as-in-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=federation as in federated wiki?\|~~clarify~~=survey-first}}		*** {{d\|id=fed-as-in-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=federation as in federated wiki?\|extends=survey-first}}

	<!--		<!--
Line 49:		Line 49:
	* {{d\|id=page-forking \|a=? \|type=question \|text=problem with wiki is that there is only one version of each page - what if you disagree? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=page-forking \|a=? \|type=question \|text=problem with wiki is that there is only one version of each page - what if you disagree? \|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id=fed-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=in wiki each page has a single version ==> federated wiki is the solution \|supports=page-forking}}		** {{d\|id=fed-wiki \|a=? \|type=question \|text=in wiki each page has a single version ==> federated wiki is the solution \|supports=page-forking}}
	** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-git \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=pages in a federated wiki are more like working in branches as in git \|~~clarifies~~=fed-wiki}}		** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-git \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=pages in a federated wiki are more like working in branches as in git \|extends=fed-wiki}}
	*** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-merging \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=''branches'' and ''merges'' are important ideas in the federated wiki concept space \|supports=fed-wiki-git}}		*** {{d\|id=fed-wiki-merging \|a=? \|type=claim \|text=''branches'' and ''merges'' are important ideas in the federated wiki concept space \|supports=fed-wiki-git}}
	* {{d\|id=author-dgs \|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=we talk about DGs as if they are done by the reader of a paper, but at some point, authors will start out by creating DGs to which readers will respond. We should consider the reader ==> author transition \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=author-dgs \|a=KH \|type=claim \|text=we talk about DGs as if they are done by the reader of a paper, but at some point, authors will start out by creating DGs to which readers will respond. We should consider the reader ==> author transition \|supports=}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:01, 13 November 2022
Line 149:		Line 149:

	== Section 3 Kyle ==		== Section 3 Kyle ==
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=~~claim~~ \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=start-w-schemas \|a= \|type=question \|text=What if we start with naming & schemas first \|supports=}}
	* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=question \|text=do we start with a schema or refine as we go? \|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=smw makes this hard for exactly this reason (deciding up front is friction). \|supports=}}		** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=smw makes this hard for exactly this reason (deciding up front is friction). \|supports=start-w-schemas}}
	** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=easier with free form mediawiki templates and wiki text \|supports=}}		** {{d\|id=simple-mw \|a= \|type=claim \|text=easier with free form mediawiki templates and wiki text \|supports=start-w-schemas}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=templates allow tiny Lua templates, w/ any number of fields and presentation. \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=templates allow tiny Lua templates, w/ any number of fields and presentation. \|supports=simple-mw}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=this can be edited flexibly, so schema changes don't break things or make them illegible. \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=this can be edited flexibly, so schema changes don't break things or make them illegible. \|supports=simple-mw}}

	** {{d\|id= \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=is there a problem extending from mw to smw later? \|~~supports~~=}}		** {{d\|id= \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=is there a problem extending from mw to smw later? \|extends=simple-mw}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=no, can start with a dozen schemas by hand, then decide if to move to a MW extension (smw or other) or wikidata \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=no, can start with a dozen schemas by hand, then decide if to move to a MW extension (smw or other) or wikidata \|supports=simple-mw}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=depends on what authoring + visualization tools we want, and the modelling tradeoffs we want \|supports=}}		*** {{d\|id= \|a= \|type=claim \|text=depends on what authoring + visualization tools we want, and the modelling tradeoffs we want \|supports=simple-mw}}

	* {{d\|id=template-start \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=should we start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=template-start \|a=KK \|type=question \|text=should we start with creating a "source" template: source: url, publisher, date, author ? \|supports=}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:07, 13 November 2022
Line 73:		Line 73:
	* {{d\|id=what-dg-types \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what types of graph are we talking about? \|supports=}}		* {{d\|id=what-dg-types \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what types of graph are we talking about? \|supports=}}
	** {{d\|id=lacking-meta-dgs \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=I haven't seen dgs about discourse: chains of reasoning, mapping out arguments - these can be linear if there is a dialog \|supports=what-dg-types}}		** {{d\|id=lacking-meta-dgs \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=I haven't seen dgs about discourse: chains of reasoning, mapping out arguments - these can be linear if there is a dialog \|supports=what-dg-types}}
	*** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what does composite graph of discourse addressing the same issues look like? \|extends=lacking-meta-dgs}}		*** {{d\|id=composite-dg \|a=SJ \|type=question \|text=what does composite graph of discourse addressing the same issues look like? \|extends=lacking-meta-dgs}}
	** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=personal or group notetaking: connections are not discourse connections - they include refrences, clarifiers, and links of definitions \|supports=what-dg-types}}		** {{d\|id= \|a=SJ \|type=claim \|text=personal or group notetaking: connections are not discourse connections - they include refrences, clarifiers, and links of definitions \|supports=what-dg-types}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:50, 23 November 2022
Line 306:		Line 306:
	*** people randomly talk about things - but when they mention the same thing we should be able to see that		*** people randomly talk about things - but when they mention the same thing we should be able to see that
	*** in the wiki, we refer to things with direct links - everything is a direct link		*** in the wiki, we refer to things with direct links - everything is a direct link
	- everywhere there is a link - there is a hover that shows everything that links to X		*** everywhere there is a link - there is a hover that shows everything that links to X
	- rather than having to click on x we can see links on hover }}		*** rather than having to click on x we can see links on hover }}
	- {{d\|id=social-utility \|a=KK \|type= claim \|text=KK: this would encode proof of use, proof of utility}}		***{{d\|id=social-utility \|a=KK \|type= claim \|text=KK: this would encode proof of use, proof of utility}}
	- {{d\|id=querying \|a=DA \|type= question \|text=DA: with sparql queries - can you browse the whole wiki tree and parse out what you want from that?}}		* {{d\|id=querying \|a=DA \|type= question \|text=DA: with sparql queries - can you browse the whole wiki tree and parse out what you want from that?}}
	- {{d\|id=querying \|a=KM \|type= claim \|text=Km: yes - it's the right query language for this kind of data}}		** {{d\|id=querying \|a=KM \|type= claim \|text=Km: yes - it's the right query language for this kind of data}}
	- {{d\|id=querying \|a=DA \|type= question \|text=DA: can you see the context for the link inside of the page? if I'm referring to a link, can I see the sentence that link is embedded in?}}		*{{d\|id=querying \|a=DA \|type= question \|text=DA: can you see the context for the link inside of the page? if I'm referring to a link, can I see the sentence that link is embedded in?}}
	- {{d\|id=querying \|a=KM \|type= claim \|text= we'd need to annotate the wiki using the DG schema and then query against that schema -- the amazing thing about sparql is that anything thats connected, you can get there}}		** {{d\|id=querying \|a=KM \|type= claim \|text= we'd need to annotate the wiki using the DG schema and then query against that schema -- the amazing thing about sparql is that anything thats connected, you can get there}}
	- {{d\|id=tool \|a=KK \|type=claim \|text= seems like we're rediscovering properties native to roam and trying to put them in the wiki}}		* {{d\|id=tool \|a=KK \|type=claim \|text= seems like we're rediscovering properties native to roam and trying to put them in the wiki}}
	- {{d\|id=structure \|a=DA \|type= claim \|text=DA:DA: the hover is sugar - we can get there by putting everything on a page: on the bottom of a claims page we have everything that mentions this claim and an extra field that describes, enriches the mention (support/oppose) context}}		* {{d\|id=structure \|a=DA \|type= claim \|text=DA:DA: the hover is sugar - we can get there by putting everything on a page: on the bottom of a claims page we have everything that mentions this claim and an extra field that describes, enriches the mention (support/oppose) context}}
	- {{d\|id=agora \|a=KM \|type= claim \|text=KM agora is partly a discovery algo for a graph		* {{d\|id=agora \|a=KM \|type= claim \|text=KM agora is partly a discovery algo for a graph
	- component of building an autocomplete for DGs is a mechanism to discover graphs and do the autocomplete so they algo can work off of		** component of building an autocomplete for DGs is a mechanism to discover graphs and do the autocomplete so they algo can work off of
	- once there are DG to work from, agora algo seems like a useful tool to search the ecosystem }}		** once there are DG to work from, agora algo seems like a useful tool to search the ecosystem }}
	- {{d\|id=agora \|a=DA \|type= question \|text= how do you get data into an agora ?}}		** {{d\|id=agora \|a=DA \|type= question \|text= how do you get data into an agora ?}}
	- {{d\|id=agora \|a=SJ \|type= claim \|text= a mediawiki could be an agora}}		** {{d\|id=agora \|a=SJ \|type= claim \|text= a mediawiki could be an agora}}
	- {{d\|id=agora \|a=KH \|type= question \|text= we still have to encode each node as a page if we want to build on this ~~agaora~~ model}}		** {{d\|id=agora \|a=KH \|type= question \|text= we still have to encode each node as a page if we want to build on this agora model}}
	- {{d\|id=granularity \|a=SJ \|type= question \|text= SJ: question about the appropriate level of granularity?}}		* {{d\|id=granularity \|a=SJ \|type= question \|text= SJ: question about the appropriate level of granularity?}}
	- {{d\|id=granularity \|a=KH \|type= question \|text=KH: also identity question - what is the smallest item you can point to?}}		* {{d\|id=granularity \|a=KH \|type= question \|text=KH: also identity question - what is the smallest item you can point to?}}
	- {{d\|id=structure \|a=SJ \|type= claim \|text=SJ: 2 separate ID Q:		**{{d\|id=structure \|a=SJ \|type= claim \|text=SJ: 2 separate ID Q:
	- let's add the concept of a page for a graph		*** let's add the concept of a page for a graph
	- something you can hold in your mind as an image		***something you can hold in your mind as an image
	- more than one claim		*** more than one claim
	- individual claims shouldn't be pages, but nodes or entities		*** individual claims shouldn't be pages, but nodes or entities
	- if we want to do this in the wikiverse we can talk about them as entities		*** if we want to do this in the wikiverse we can talk about them as entities
	- SMW will represent ~~entitites~~ as pages but it doesn't scale}}		*** SMW will represent entities as pages but it doesn't scale}}
	- {{d\|id=SMW \|a=DA \|type= question \|text=SMW will not support a large volume?}}		** {{d\|id=SMW \|a=DA \|type= question \|text=SMW will not support a large volume?}}
	- {{d\|id= SMW \|a=SJ \|type= evidence \|text= SMW is designed for pages to ~~jave~~ sizeable amt of text, well-formatted and structured		** {{d\|id= SMW \|a=SJ \|type= evidence \|text= SMW is designed for pages to have sizeable amt of text, well-formatted and structured
	- we're talking about entire constellations }} (also a claim)		** we're talking about entire constellations }} (also a claim)
	- {{d\|id=viz \|a=SJ \|type= question \|text= Q of what viz we need -		* {{d\|id=viz \|a=SJ \|type= question \|text= Q of what viz we need -
	- can still use mw as a viz - what happens when we hover over?		** can still use MW as a viz - what happens when we hover over?
	- want to be able to see the links while ~~loking~~ at the claim in context }}		** want to be able to see the links while looking at the claim in context }}
	- {{d\|id=tool \|a=SJ \|type= claim \|text=SJ: it does make sense to use a wiki for prototyping and experimenting - like where we want to carve distinctions		* {{d\|id=tool \|a=SJ \|type= claim \|text=SJ: it does make sense to use a wiki for prototyping and experimenting - like where we want to carve distinctions
	- it's nice to be able to go back & forth in a collab text format		**it's nice to be able to go back & forth in a collab text format
	- take snapshots and convert to a permanently structured DG		**take snapshots and convert to a permanently structured DG
	- more lastingly machine readable version of the same discourse		** more lastingly machine readable version of the same discourse
	- wiki capture could feel more like a discourse if the discourse originated with people		** wiki capture could feel more like a discourse if the discourse originated with people
	- iteratively annotate and structure}}		** iteratively annotate and structure}}
	- {{d\|id= tool \|a=KH \|type= question \|text=KH: it's nice to have a familiar authoring tool like a wiki		*{{d\|id= tool \|a=KH \|type= question \|text=KH: it's nice to have a familiar authoring tool like a wiki
	- {{d\|id=approach \|a=KH \|type= claim \|text= it would make sense to start with something like we did and have an external tool go over it and store it for later processing		* {{d\|id=approach \|a=KH \|type= claim \|text= it would make sense to start with something like we did and have an external tool go over it and store it for later processing
	- wiki is a data entry tool		** wiki is a data entry tool
	- we still don't have relations		** we still don't have relations
	- but this is not so much a problem privately, only when we merge}}		- but this is not so much a problem privately, only when we merge}}
	- {{d\|id= goal \|a=KK \|type= claim \|text=KK: we're in a serach for conventions: how do we write anywhere in a discourse graph?}}		- {{d\|id= goal \|a=KK \|type= claim \|text=KK: we're in a serach for conventions: how do we write anywhere in a discourse graph?}}
	- {{d\|id= goal \|a=KH \|type= claim \|text=our goal is to create Markdown for Discourse Graphs - a set of syntax conventions portable everywhere - we can extract and port to appropriate DB to query and viz later }}		- {{d\|id= goal \|a=KH \|type= claim \|text=our goal is to create Markdown for Discourse Graphs - a set of syntax conventions portable everywhere - we can extract and port to appropriate DB to query and viz later }}