Re: fresnel thoughts

From: Chris Bizer <>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:59:07 -0500

Hi David,

> I've been thinking a bit about how much of fresnel I can use with
> haystack. It is my hope that we can use both the "lens" and "style"
> vocabularies, and essentially to use the same lenses and styles that
> are being used in longwell.

Yes, this would be cool.

> I did realize one interesting
> problem---one I created myself by insisting the hierarchical
> representation not contain rdf. Haystack is in general going to be
> pretty happy with the hierarchical layout generated by fresnel's
> lens/style combination. But items in haystack are supposed to be
> active---when the user right clicks, or drags one, haystack is going
> to have to know which _resource_ is being addressed by the user.

We ruled actions out of scope for Fresnel at one of the meetings, so
Haystack could extend Fresnel with a vocabulary for actions, if you guys
want to model them using RDF.

> We
> can easily find out which _visual element_ of the hierarchical model
> is being addressed, but since we took any reference to the underlying
> rdf out of the intermediate representation, how can haystack map back
> to the underlying resource?
> It would be a shame for this to be the one issue that prevents
> haystack from adopting fresnel completely, so suggestions for fix
> would be appreciated!

I don't see a major problem here. The intermediate tree I proposed yesterday
hasn't contained this references. But there is no problem in extending this
intermediate tree to contain the references you are needing.

But again. I see the intermediate tree as an implementation issue. Fresnel
lenses specify which data should be displayed. How this data is passed on to
other parts of the display engine is complete up to the needs of these


Received on Tue Mar 22 2005 - 23:59:18 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Aug 09 2012 - 16:39:18 EDT