Burma Jones said:.......An admin is just about ready so that folks can start entering data, if anyone would like to volunteer.
Okay, I've got some time off next week, so I'll volunteer. :)
Burma Jones said:.......An admin is just about ready so that folks can start entering data, if anyone would like to volunteer.
anart said:jeep said:Yes, it certainly does give weight to the whole conspiracy agenda to think that FDR actually said this, but since he really didn't, I don't believe it's right to keep inferring that he did.
Apologies for the grammatical nitpicking, but in case it helps if you use the words elsewhere - the word inferring is incorrectly used here. You mean to say 'to keep implying that he did'. The reader or listener infers, the writer or speaker implies - just a fwiw...
Galahad said:Looks very nice!
Will you be able to read in files with multiple entries, or will entries have to be entered one-by-one?
Sunspots said:YEAR MON SSN DEV
1749 1 58.0 24.1
1749 2 62.6 25.1
1749 3 70.0 26.6
1749 4 55.7 23.6
1749 5 85.0 29.4
1749 6 83.5 29.2
1749 7 94.8 31.1
1749 8 66.3 25.9
1749 9 75.9 27.7
1749 10 75.5 27.7
1749 11 158.6 40.6
1749 12 85.2 29.5
1750 1 73.3 27.3
1750 2 75.9 27.7
1750 3 89.2 30.2
1750 4 88.3 30.0
1750 5 90.0 30.3
1750 6 100.0 32.0
1750 7 85.4 29.5
1750 8 103.0 32.5
1750 9 91.2 30.5
1750 10 65.7 25.7
1750 11 63.3 25.3
1750 12 75.4 27.7
etc
Wars said:(BC)
First Dynasty Wars 2925 – 2776,
Mesopotamian Wars of the Early Dynastic Period 2900 – 2334,
Second Dynasty Wars 2775 – 2650,
Sargon's Conquest of Mesopotamia 2334 –2279,
Nomadic Invasions of Akkad 2217 -2193,
Ninth Dynasty Wars 2130 -2080,
Uruk-Gutian War 2117 -2110,
Sumerian Campaigns of Ur-Nammu 2112 -2095,
Twin Dynasty Wars 2064 -1986,
Ur-Amorite Wars 2034 -2004,
Elamite Destruction of Ur 2004,
Laura said:jeep said:Yes, it certainly does give weight to the whole conspiracy agenda to think that FDR actually said this, but since he really didn't, I don't believe it's right to keep inferring that he did.
Apologies for the grammatical nitpicking, but in case it helps if you use the words elsewhere - the word inferring is incorrectly used here. You mean to say 'to keep implying that he did'. The reader or listener infers, the writer or speaker implies - just a fwiw...
Actually, some people are inferring that he MUST have said it, and then implying to others that he did. In this case, pitching and catching are taking place almost simultaneously.
Wikipedia said:Abbott and Costello performed "Who's on First?" numerous times in their careers, rarely performing it the same way twice. Once, they did the routine at President Roosevelt's request.
One by one is probably not going to be scalable at all, and doesn't work very well when the data is coming from another source that can be scraped. One way that I have done this in the past in other projects is to allow OpenOffice documents to be uploaded (OpenOffice since the internal format is XML, which is easy to work with). The column headers would be well-defined, like "Description", "Date", "Source", etc., and then each line below would have the actual data. A submitted document can then be parsed and the data extracted and put into the database. Not only does this allow lots of data to be input at once, but it also helps scraping scenarios (e.g. scrape a webpage and generate the OpenOffice document), and it also makes it possible to do the data entering "offline", which can then be uploaded in bulk.Burma Jones said:Well, the way the admin is being made at the moment, it would be one entry at a time. Could do bulk upload, but where would we get the source files? One way or another, those would have to be put into some sort of machine readable form one by one. Can you give an example of the sort of file you are talking about?Galahad said:Looks very nice!
Will you be able to read in files with multiple entries, or will entries have to be entered one-by-one?
foofighter said:Not only does this allow lots of data to be input at once, but it also helps scraping scenarios (e.g. scrape a webpage and generate the OpenOffice document), and it also makes it possible to do the data entering "offline", which can then be uploaded in bulk.
And you could add source (e.g. book, article), location (Country/City/Region), author (who put it in, without which you're going to have security issues), when it was put in, etc. etc. One problem with all this, and with using a relational database in the first place, is that we are talking about a sparse data model, where each node could have one or a hundred possible attributes. Relational databases are really really bad at handling those kind of datasets, and are also really lousy at being able to do interesting things with it once you have the data. It's simply not what they were made for (they rock at keeping bank accounts though). If it was me I'd opt for using either an RDF database instead (which the Simile widgets prefer also, and then you can do faceted browsing much easier), or a graph database (like Neo4j, which would allow you to do some really cool analysis algorithms on the data). Anything would be better than a relational database, really, for this type of data.Burma Jones said:Excellent points. So, the minimum data required for each point is a title (the text that appears on the timeline) and a start date/time (at least the year, but will take all date/time info including day-of-week).
Optional information:
description (can be html, will default to the title if not included)
end date/time (if the event is a date span like "Crimean War")
icon
event type (Cs, historical document, archeological evidence, mythology, religious document) - probably the best way to handle this with bulk upload is to create separate XML docs for each type
links
What we have in the db schema that is implemented on the timeline yet but will be very soon:
tags (for filtering)
people involved (this will give an option of either getting more info on the person or filtering the timeline to show events involving this person)
If you want people to start working on this Right Now, I would strongly suggest that you make an example spreadsheet with given row headers, as that is going to make it a heck of a lot easier to parse it later on. Don't forget to specify date formats and any other kind of formats for fields as well. I would write todays date as "2009-10-16", but other people might not. Having a consistent format from the beginning helps a lot.So, would be cool is some of you could start collecting the above information and putting it in any machine readable format, meaning that there is a pattern to where each data point is so that I can easily parse it. Can be XML, spreadsheet, comma delimited file, whatever. While you do that, I'll get tags and people implemented along with the several thousand other things I've got to get done. :o)
If you want to look at a technology that really would fit quite well with the intent of this project, look at freebase.com. They have an open database where anyone can add more data, and then there's tons of tools to import/export/visualize it, and use it in your own website. Read their About page for more info on why a relational database just doesn't work all that well for this kind of semi-structured data.foofighter said:If it was me I'd opt for using either an RDF database instead (which the Simile widgets prefer also, and then you can do faceted browsing much easier), or a graph database (like Neo4j, which would allow you to do some really cool analysis algorithms on the data). Anything would be better than a relational database, really, for this type of data.
foofighter said:And you could add source (e.g. book, article), location (Country/City/Region), author (who put it in, without which you're going to have security issues), when it was put in, etc. etc.
foofighter said:One problem with all this, and with using a relational database in the first place, is that we are talking about a sparse data model, where each node could have one or a hundred possible attributes. Relational databases are really really bad at handling those kind of datasets, and are also really lousy at being able to do interesting things with it once you have the data. It's simply not what they were made for (they rock at keeping bank accounts though). If it was me I'd opt for using either an RDF database instead (which the Simile widgets prefer also, and then you can do faceted browsing much easier), or a graph database (like Neo4j, which would allow you to do some really cool analysis algorithms on the data). Anything would be better than a relational database, really, for this type of data.
foofighter said:I know you are eager to rush forward with this (I would be too), but IMHO you should stop and consider what your options are first, and what the consequences are with going different routes, both for the data management, input handling, and visualization.
dant said:The "upside" to Webhosting (co-hosting) is
low or no maintenance (with exception to
co-hosting), and high bandwidth connection,
redundancy, and perhaps with a few "bells and
whistles" thrown in such as "software: website,
database, etc...", but with less control?
Burma Jones said:dant said:The "upside" to Webhosting (co-hosting) is
low or no maintenance (with exception to
co-hosting), and high bandwidth connection,
redundancy, and perhaps with a few "bells and
whistles" thrown in such as "software: website,
database, etc...", but with less control?
I'm not sure I follow. We already have plenty of server
space available with everything in place.
dant said:The question is, is the site you are working on,
trustable, and the work will not be co-opted?