- From: Chris Chapman <chris@pentandra.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 10:25:47 -0600
- To: public-hydra@w3.org
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 05:13:49PM +0200, Jindřich Mynarz wrote: > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be> wrote: > >> I think the critique of the diagram as confusing is too vague to > >> produce an improvement. What in particular is confusing about this diagram? > > > > I interpreted it as "at first sight"; > > i.e., you're interested, come to the document, are overwhelmed, > > and then just close it because you think it's going to be difficult. > > How about improving it by having 2 diagrams: > > - Higher-level (really "at a glance") diagram depicting the main > classes that correspond to the (new) structure of the Hydra > specification. > - Detailed diagram (like the current one) depicting the (almost) > complete Hydra vocabulary. +1. It seems like the spec is forming into fairly discrete components(?), and it may be good to have a diagram per component. At first, start with the basic building blocks, and then give the "big picture" at the end. -- Chris Chapman Pentandra Research Solutions, Inc. Breaking Research Barriers Tel: +1 435 294 2964 Email: chris@pentandra.com Twitter: @cd_chapman Website: http://pentandra.com
Received on Monday, 25 August 2014 16:26:26 UTC