Visual representation of data

Posted by quant
Sep 2, 2010 at 04:38 PM

you’re probably right, and I’m too optimistic about this 3d. we can only speculate now.

The small difference from your situation is that you had static 3d map showing it only from single view. Say if I couldn’t make head and tail out of what I saw, I could try to rotate it, in whatever direction, or flatten it to 2d, or try different layout. maybe it would help, maybe not.

It might be also that we are simply not used to see info with all the relationship in 3d, or maybe it’s just too much for our brains to grasp it.

But I’d really love to give it a goooood try :)

Tom S. wrote:
> >
>quant wrote:
>>I think it’s not just the amount of data, it’s the “data with
>relationships” that it
>>could display efficiently.
>>Once you start to have
>multiple parents and links
>>between “far” items, it’s impossible to display it in
>tree structure.
>>Also programs
>>like the brain, connectd text, mind raider have
>problem with that, because it’s in
>>plane.
> >Your comments remind me of a story. When
>I was a graduate student I was putting together some data and presented my advisor with
>a graph that represented a 3 dimensional relationship. He said he ‘d always wanted to
>publish a graph like that. It was a very compact graph with a lot of information about
>the relationships involved. The problem was that no one could focus enough on any one
>of the relationships on the plot to be able to define the position of each point with the
>precision we required. In the end, we went with two 2D graphs to represent the
>data.
> >The need to evaluate the relationships in this program isn’t for anything
>quite as precise. But I was really overwhelmed with what I saw on the screen and I’m
>thinking it would be too easy to get lost in it and too difficult to focus on any one
>relationship.
> >Could be wrong.
> >Tom S.