Re: Graph data anyone?

[Danny Ayers]

>
> Thanks for these pointers. This is really the big task ahead of me (though
> the editing aspect will take some time!) - somehow making the drawn graph
> more closely represent the intended semantics in the domain, rather than
the
> RDF/DAML representation. This would be relatively straightforward to
> hard-code for a specific domain, but making it generic seems a lot harder.
> At present I'm thinking about providing an additional (RDF) data file,
> containing a mapping between the visual graph representation (which will
> correspond to the 'humanised' semantics) and the underlying data in the
RDF
> (or DAML) model.

I think that this is a useful approach.  Consider that the purpose of the
graph is visualization ***for a person***.  People have different
visualization needs for different types of rdf (and other, of course)
graphs, and may even have a need for more than one vusialization style for
the same data set.  It would be virtually impossible, I think, for a single
processor to "understand" what style was needed and what parts of a given
graph would contribute to it.

This knowledge then needs to be stored somewhere, and better to be in a
graph display definition file than hard-coded in.

> ...
> At the moment these two goals (editing & domain 'relevance') are my main
> targets, though further down the line I'd like to add a little reasoning
> based around the underlying graph model(s) - for instance, there are quite
a
> few domains in which shortest-path or travelling salesman algorithms could
> be useful.
>
>
You know, this reminds me of XML Spy's ability to give you a editable
display page for an xml file, based on a template built for each type of xml
document.

Good work!

Cheers,

Tom P