W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-isaviz@w3.org > March 2002

RE: great! (& ui question)

From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 16:09:26 +0100
To: "Emmanuel Pietriga" <emmanuel.pietriga@xrce.xerox.com>
Cc: <www-isaviz@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EBEPLGMHCDOJJJPCFHEFKEAIFEAA.danny666@virgilio.it>
>Right now, there is now way to hide properties/statements in the graph
>However you can activate or deactivate at will statements / resources /
>literals using the icons 2 to 5 of the 2nd row of icons ((de)activation)
>. They will still be visible in the graph window (rendered using shades
>of gray) but they will not be part of generated RDF file (they however
>get saved in ISV project files as "deactivated" nodes/edges).
>You can consider the (de)activation feature as an equivalent of
>commenting out parts of an RDF/XML file.

Right, that should do the trick for what I'm after today, thanks!
Deactivation is a great idea, btw.

>Showing/hiding properties by their name in the graph window would be a
>nice feature, and I hope to include this in a future release.

What I had in mind more was the ability to load in a given vocabulary (and
perhaps store within a kind of template) and for it to be available for use
within docs in exactly the same fashion as terms from the rdf & rdfs
namespaces are currently available.

After my last mail I remembered one thing I found a little puzzling with the
way Jena had implemented these bits - i.e. having the static classes with
RDF.type or whatever. I think Brian's argument was basically that the terms
were static, hence this was the best approach. To me it struck me as being
more practical for this stuff to be loaded dynamically, which (if I remember
correctly) to some extent is possible with the API as it stands.

Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 10:26:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:45:33 UTC