[Gzz-commits] manuscripts/UMLLink article.rst

[Tuomas J. Lukka]

CVSROOT:        /cvsroot/gzz
Module name:    manuscripts
Changes by:     Tuomas J. Lukka <address@hidden>        03/02/15 09:21:14

Modified files:
        UMLLink        : article.rst 

Log message:
        twids

CVSWeb URLs:
http://savannah.gnu.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/gzz/manuscripts/UMLLink/article.rst.diff?tr1=1.64&tr2=1.65&r1=text&r2=text

Patches:
Index: manuscripts/UMLLink/article.rst
diff -u manuscripts/UMLLink/article.rst:1.64 
manuscripts/UMLLink/article.rst:1.65
--- manuscripts/UMLLink/article.rst:1.64        Sat Feb 15 09:13:05 2003
+++ manuscripts/UMLLink/article.rst     Sat Feb 15 09:21:14 2003
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
 .. Alternative title: "Free Software toolchain for bidirectional 
    linking between UML diagrams and Javadoc"
 
-.. :Stamp: $Id: article.rst,v 1.64 2003/02/15 14:13:05 tjl Exp $
+.. :Stamp: $Id: article.rst,v 1.65 2003/02/15 14:21:14 tjl Exp $
 
 .. Points for HT people
    ====================
@@ -413,17 +413,22 @@
 
 The design for bi-directional navigation
 ========================================
-XXX Hypertext blaablaa something...
------------------------------------
+
+Usability considerations
+------------------------
 
 The usability of hypertext-based documentation may suffer from user's
 disorientation: the tendency to lose one's sense of location and
 direction in a nonlinear document
-[conklin87hypertext-onpage-38-40]_. That means, users don't know where
+[conklin87hypertext-onpage-38-40]_. This means that users don't know where
 they are in the documentation network or how to get to some other
-place that they know to exist in the network. In our documentation
-this gets even more complex, because we have two distinct pieces of
-documentation, which should have somehow unified navigation.
+place that they know to exist in the network. 
+
+..  In our documentation
+    this gets even more complex, because we have two distinct pieces of
+    documentation, which should have somehow unified navigation.
+
+    XXX more complex than what? two > network??
 
 Edwards and Hardman [edwards-hardman89lost-in-hyperspace]_ argue that
 the most appropriate types of navigation devices would be based on
@@ -433,14 +438,19 @@
 allowed to develop a cognitive map of one view of the data structure
 before being given the opinion of navigating through the data some
 other way [edwards-hardman89lost-in-hyperspace-onpage-123]_.
-    
-We didn't need to look long for a common navigational metaphor to
-unify the two distinct pieces. Since the most of our UML diagrams
-included objects representing certain Java classes, it was clear to
-use those diagrams for cross-documential navigation. UML diagrams not
+
+In our case,
+UML diagrams are the obvious candidate
+for a common navigational metaphor to
+unify the two distinct pieces. 
+The UML diagrams
+include graphical objects representing Java classes, 
+UML diagrams not
 only show the readers a map of documentation but also perform as
 spatial navigation menus.
 
+..  XXX
+
 XXX linking UML diagrams
 ------------------------
 
@@ -448,7 +458,8 @@
 
 Looking closer, we can divide our UML diagrams into three classes:
 conceptual diagrams, specification diagrams and implementation
-diagrams. Different diagram types can be linked within the
+diagrams. [XXX source!!!]
+Different diagram types can be linked within the
 design documentation and to javadoc as follows:
 
 .. figure:: table