Liquid View Presentations Tests

I have been using Scapple to map out how Doug Engelbart’s process fits the academic document process, which turned out to be quite useful to see where there was a mismatch (Doug was not concerned with the career of the academic, only the work, at least in his formal models). The process was also useful exercise in testing out how a real-world project would use a Liquid View, in that I could not simply freeform layout everything and anything, it needed to have a means through which it would be done in a Liquid View.

This is the full size screenshot:

I took the screenshot and annotated it in Keynote:

Jacob has cleanly separated the word processing view and the TOC outline view in Author so I can’t wait for Author to ship so we can start to experiment with these views…

Another exercise from today highlights the need to allow the user to add borders:

Comment from Mark Bernstein (email 6 August 2017):

“Perhaps it does, but the illustration doesn’t make the argument, at least not to me, at first glance. The right-hand slide, which I suppose is a Engelbart creation from relatively late (1990s?), is not a distinguished slide.
The left-hand slide, which I think is yours, is significantly clearer.  It’s got two borders. The lozenge around “external environment” does not appear to have a purpose at all, and is also oddly placed; why not center the text? Why, for that matter, is the environment, which by definition encompasses everything, enclosed?  The second border is better, but it prevents a confusion which would not in fact occur; there is already sufficient white space to distinguish this list from other lists in the view.”
My thought in reply to this is that he is right but we may need to figure out a way to add labels to arrows, which is only a related issue.

‘Making PDF Great Again’

The Goal

I am looking at producing a document format which will be used for ‘publishing’ academic documents which provides ‘a rich amount of data’ for a reader to interact with, not thin documents like current PDFs.

  • By ‘publishing’ I mean making public, in a way which freezes the document, much like making a printed document public.
  • By ‘a rich amount of data’ I mean keeping any meta-data the author would want to include, as well as any advanced views of the document, such as something in the style of Liquid Views: http://www.liquid.info/view.html

The Challenge

The ubiquity of PDFs will make it hard to challenge the current workflow.

The Workflow to Augment

The purpose of this project is to augment the full academic and scientific workflow – the interoperability feature is required to fully support the full lifecycle:

•  The Literature Review which currently happens through ‘thin’ PDF documents.
•  Performing Experiments
•  Developing The Thesis
•  Authoring
•  Collaboration & Review
•  Publishing. This is where the current PDF publishing method strips out a large amount of contextual data generated in the process, providing the person who is doing a literature review based on this document only a thin sliver of what was generated.

The Proposal : Rich PDF

Many in the  academic world are generally well versed in writing to export in LaTex to make sure their documents appear in the appropriate academic layout style.

The proposal here is to help the author tag their document as though exporting using LaTex style tagging/formatting, and using this tag data to export as a properly formatted PDF and adding a full XML sheet of all the attributes the author would like to have persist with the document (removing any data such as earlier drafts which the author may not want added).

For those who are not used to LaText all they will notice is that they are highlighting and tagging the document.

 

The user simply marks up the important elements of the document and these elements are preserved even though the published form is PDF

 

Open Document in Standard PDF Reader

Anyone can then open the resulting .pdf document in any PDF reader to read the document as they expect.

Open Document in Rich PDF Reader

Any user with a Rich PDF aware application can open the document and the PDF rendered layout can be thought of almost as a label which is not used; the rich data from the document is still contained within and can be used for a rich reading experience.

Specific Benefits

All the advanced features of the authoring environment will be retained. For example:

•  Free-form layouts for mind maps/concept maps will have all the 2D/3D layout data preserved for the reader to view how the author saw the connections in the document.
•  Live formulas will be preserved for the reader to interact with.
•  Rich data can be included, in compressed form.

Adoption & Power

This way we have an entirely new document format which will enable the user to richly and powerfully interact with the data in a published, ‘archived’ document yet everyone can open the powerfully features of the basic document.

Producers of authoring software can then further innovate with advanced reading functionality, knowing that documents can support the interactions.

Development Opportunities

If my word processor features an advanced layout then another developer’s software can choose to be able to use the data from my word processor or offer alternatives views, but not destroy the data which was generated by my word processor, so the user can always go back and view it in my application.

Implementation

In order to create such a system we will need to evaluate current rich document interchange standards and write up a spec based on this for the XML in PDF data, which we will then share with our friends in the word processor development community, where we will then settle on a standard which will be useable across the board.

I will be in touch with developer friends once a basic in-house spec has been generally agreed upon.

PostScript : Why Now?

“…the way that scientists share their results once they have them  … it’s a PDF in a journal that you can download and you can look at charts and graphs and read a static document, that’s what it is basically, there might be the odd chance to download a bit of data or watch a video or look at some pictures but for the most part it’s the same technology that’s been around for hundreds of years albeit you can now download it in a PDF and to Freeman’s mind, and it’s a fair point, that’s ridiculous…’

 Jeremy Freeman of Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, referred to in 14 minutes in on the Wired podcast https://overcast.fm/+OFMaEXgU

(Since Stuart Arnott brought the Freeman podcast to my attention I have been thinking (again) about about to re-invent academic documents. I sent a page of suggestions to a few people, including my advisor Les Carr, Joe Corneli (who has the very interesting notion of Scholia to put in the mix), Christopher Gutteridge who shredded my proposal (thanks, it was useful) and Mark Anderson with whom I had a long chat, which should have been recorded but these chats are often in loud student areas so likely would have been horrible to listen to anyway)

This lead to the concept presented here, for which I am grateful to Jeremy Freeman for providing the impetus.

Criteria for Views for the Liquid | Author project

Context

The Criteria for Views for the Liquid | Author project are based on the use case a student building a paper for advisors, external reviewers and the academic community at large.

A View simply refers to a visual way of displaying information. The primary information format here is text, with moving and still, 2D and 3D, interactive and passive imagery, music and at some point, haptics integrated. AR and VR are outside of initial focus but could well provide useful Views in the future. 

A workspace where the primary view can not be rolled into a Word Processing scrollable view (‘WP’) is outside of the views for this project and are covered by other projects such as Debate Graph, The Brain as well as many Mind and Concept Mapping solutions. 

The core view is the standard scrolling scroll used in word processing applications. The reason is not only that it is currently the view accepted by academia for a paper and thus connects into current workflows. It is also that this view provides an efficient use of space and is supportive of long form writing and reading. 

Criteria

Any views must not interfere with other views.

All views must be instantly available, technically and interaction wise. 

The visual clarity of the view should not be sacrificed for clumsy functionality.

Interactions should be manual as well as criteria based, at will.

Please contribute: XX…

Initial Views

Word Processing/‘WP’

Traditional Word Processing ‘WP’ scrollable based views:

  

•  Show only Headings (outline, accessed through pinch)  

•  Show only sentences with (temporary re-formatting, accessed through selecting word and cmd-f)  

•  Colour keywords based on colour glossary   

•  Show only first sentence per paragraph

•  Flow; break the text on , and double break on . (etc.) for a more listy view

Timeline

Timeline, based on time of creation of the document sections or reference in the body text to events which happened in time. This relates to the Time Browser Project: http://timebrowser.info

Analysis Generated

 

Views generated based on semantic analysis of the document, such as:

 

•  Show Synopsis

Citation Views

Different means through which to show sources cited in the document in ways that are instantly accessible and verifiable.

Liquid | View

A view where headings from a word processing document can be re-arranged free-form across the screen, where placement is fluid and lines can be adde (manually or based on some criteria) to further show relationships. This is similar to a concept map but does not necessarily need line descriptions or arrows and it is similar to a mind map but does not need to have a central node. The document you are reading now is partly created from the thinking used to create: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vxomwv6vv87uo16/Text%20Space%20Jan%2021.png?dl=0

Please note, these are initial thoughts, these are very much the interactions and implementations where the research needs to be focused:

Implementations

 

•  As implemented in a 2D space  

•  As implemented in a 3D space

Manual Interactions

 

•  Basic interaction is to move any heading around in a view which is visually the same as the WP view with no clutter on the workspace. 

•  Drag from one heading to another and drop to create a connecting line. 

•  Option-Drag from one heading to another and drop to create a connecting line with an arrow. 

•  Drag a single heading/node to another location or include all subsections when dragging. 

•  Double click on a connecting line to give it a name/tag. 

•  Show all levels or hide below a certain level.

•  Hover over heading for access to further information and connections, such as following a link to another Liquid | View document.

Command Interactions

 

•  Show connections based on keywords from body text.

•  Show connections based on internal or external links.