A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
treevis.net
A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#2I was hoping the related techniques would themselves be organized as a tree! But doesn’t seem like it.
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#3Of course this begs the question why they aren't represented by some sort of tree visualization.
Tree visualization is one of the best-studied areas of information visualization; researchers have developed more than 200 visualization and layout techniques for trees. The treevis.net project aims to provide a hand-curated bibliographical reference to this ever-growing wealth of techniques. It offers a visual overview that users can filter to a desired subset along the design criteria of dimensionality, edge representation, and node alignment. Details, including links to the original publications, can be brought up on demand. Treevis.net has become a community effort, with researchers sending in preprints of their tree visualization techniques to be published or pointing out additional information.
Very interesting. I especially like the filtering and the older examples. Too bad most are behind paywalls.
Edit: Somebody else had the same thought heh.
Bunch of other types of visualization collections in the dropdown top-left. Appears to be suffering from link rot.
OP any backstory?
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#4Unlike the other comments, I don't think the site about tree organizations should be organized like a tree. The authors are well read in tree visualizations, in the site you can filter by "Dimensionality" or "Representation" or "Alignment", and you can combine these tags. The authors don't use trees because they know the limitations.
This reply isn't filed under the intended two posts it should reference because of limitations of how comments are structured on HN.
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#5No post body was provided.
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#6Unlike the other comments, I don't think the site about tree organizations should be organized like a tree. The authors are well read in tree visualizations, in the site you can filter by "Dimensionality" or "Representation" or "Alignment", and you can combine these tags. The authors don't use trees because they know the limitations. This reply isn't filed under the intended two posts it should reference because of l…
to the limitations on how comments are structured, as trees, not DAGs, and not just on HN but nearly everywhere: have you ever encountered a "forum" or "chat" eher you can kind of star merge several threads with a single reply?
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#7Quoted post unavailable.
[deleted]
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#8Unlike the other comments, I don't think the site about tree organizations should be organized like a tree. The authors are well read in tree visualizations, in the site you can filter by "Dimensionality" or "Representation" or "Alignment", and you can combine these tags. The authors don't use trees because they know the limitations. This reply isn't filed under the intended two posts it should reference because of l…
[deleted]
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#9Unlike the other comments, I don't think the site about tree organizations should be organized like a tree. The authors are well read in tree visualizations, in the site you can filter by "Dimensionality" or "Representation" or "Alignment", and you can combine these tags. The authors don't use trees because they know the limitations. This reply isn't filed under the intended two posts it should reference because of l…
to the limitations on how comments are structured, as trees, not DAGs, and not just on HN but nearly everywhere: have you ever encountered a "forum" or "chat" eher you can kind of star merge several threads with a single reply?
>>33567235
I can only think of Futaba-style discussion boards, that is, 4chan. On 4chan threads are linear, but you're supposed to reply to posts by mentioning their unique post nº. For example, the above comment would want to mention >>33566411 and >>33566389. You can mention as many posts as want. The posts get a backlink, so the thread is a navigable, true graph structure. Reading discussion on 4chan can be confusing as a deep chain of replies can branch out to mention a recent surface post, and to understand what's going on you have to both delve down focused reply chains but also be aware of incoming posts that are displayed cutting across any one discussion.
Here is a typical 4chan thread that demos this:
https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/87053939/#87081210
I chose to link a post where a picture visualizes a 4chan thread in a directed graph. Also, a screen above there's a "Thanks." to several other posts, in one post.
Re: A Visual Bibliography of Tree Visualization
#10That one
or that one
https://treevis.net/#Brath2012
look useful for seeing 6 million simultaneous messages in exchange, the salient content peculiar to you you rewire as strands in zero gravity depending on emphasis and the A.I. assistant has AST extrapolations at focal points