Live data from Hacker News

Nomnoml

nomnoml.com

51–60 of 165 posts

Re: Nomnoml

#51
The language is very, very nice.

However, if I ran into this incidentally (not posted to HN for review), I would never use this. I'd see the lack of a github link on the top right, and assume it's a some kind of startup making some prototype hosted tool.

The only way to find out this is open-source is to click "about," read to the third paragraph, see github mentioned, click through the link, and click on the license.

My major piece of feedback is to add a github link to the icons at the top-right of the page. A .org might also be nicer than a .com.

To people asking why this and not a graphical tool?

To me, the overhead to moving a graphical tool is very large:

1) I like being able to manage files on github and be able to use common tooling.

2) If someone (including myself, two years later) needs to install Vizio, Illustrator, or whatever other tool to edit my diagrams, pay for a cloud service, or worse, recover something which was hosted in a discontinued tool, I'm SOL.

3) Discovery is big too. I can use normal search tools to find things. If something is locked away in a .ai file, a .docx file, or a cloud service, and I lose it, it's likely lost forever.

95% of the cost of most projects is maintenance, and even if I invest 10x the time up-front into making a diagram in a tool like this (e.g. an hour to learn it, tweak it, and get the diagram I want, instead of 5 minutes in my favourite GUI), that will pay much than an hour in dividends down the line. I use Markdown, LaTeX, and similar for large or important documents because, in the long term, they save time.

Re: Nomnoml

#52

These tools show up from time to time here, and I can appreciate the technical side of things and effort put into building the tool. However, I cannot imagine using something like this in practice - either at work or for my own uses. It's so much easier just to select, drag and drop graphical elements instead of spending time learning a specific markup language and typing everything out, hoping that the elements will…

Everyone wants drag and drop, no one wants to build it.

Re: Nomnoml

#53
post #51

The language is very, very nice. However, if I ran into this incidentally (not posted to HN for review), I would never use this. I'd see the lack of a github link on the top right, and assume it's a some kind of startup making some prototype hosted tool. The only way to find out this is open-source is to click "about," read to the third paragraph, see github mentioned, click through the link, and click on the license…

Nowadays even with a GitHub link or claims of being open source you have to go check the repository to see what license they actually have and what percentage of the source is actually there. Some repos even have only binaries and some have the source for the open source projects they use.

There's actually another category. Open source software with paid plugins. I always wonder what happens when someone adds similar functionality to the open source version.

Re: Nomnoml

#54
post #31

These tools show up from time to time here, and I can appreciate the technical side of things and effort put into building the tool. However, I cannot imagine using something like this in practice - either at work or for my own uses. It's so much easier just to select, drag and drop graphical elements instead of spending time learning a specific markup language and typing everything out, hoping that the elements will…

I use PlantUML a lot, for communicating complex technical designs for juniors to implement for example, or simply for documentation. It's nice to have your diagrams as readable code which you can check in with the rest of your git repository and embed in READMEs, and the syntax is really intuitive and easy to learn. I haven't made the comparison with this particular tool yet, but in general I'd recommend this practic…

With pandoc-plot [0] you can even include them in your markdown documents and render it all to a nice PDF or website using pandoc.

[0] https://github.com/LaurentRDC/pandoc-plot

Re: Nomnoml

#55

I have a hard time understanding why any engineering team I've ever worked on would use this. Can someone sell this idea to me? Seems like a waste of time when you can knock up fast and easier to understand diagrams with something like Miro which also can be done in a multi-user environment.

I use mermaidjs for basically everything documentation related. It works in GitHub ... confluence ... everywhere. This looks like a much prettier version of that.

Yeah, for me this is why nothing else can compete. If there's native support in GitHub it's hard to see anything else as better without that feature.

Re: Nomnoml

#56
post #45
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and in many case you also somewhat want something which is less precise (and verbose) then UML theoretically is This tends to be "the" big problem with UML (and similar): Very few people care about, or have a reason to, stick 100% to UML. They want to "speak diagrams", and just like written or spoken language, our syntax and semantics is context dependent and dependent on the dialect and speech patterns and underst…

It’s a pity, because one benefit of UML would be that everyone speaks the same language. Before UML, there were many different modeling notations [0], and the goal with UML was to create a single interoperable unified language. This was successful insofar as it displaced the previous object modeling languages. However, it would be nice to have that benefit of a modeling lingua franca not only in modeling tools, but f…

Yes, but the problem of this thinking is that when communicating we inherently look for shortcuts and shaping language to the context rather than sticking strictly to a grammar and a dictionary, and to be successful at defining a natural language (and that includes diagrams) you need to accept that the job is 90% describing reality and 10% trying to shape it. If that.

UML has been reasonably successful where it described reality, or tried to gently shape things by proposing things that were close to how most people already did things. Much less so where it tried to prescribe a reality not aligned with how people communicates, or where it has not kept up with the way that has evolved. It'd be more successful at being a lingua franca if the focus was more on documenting how people actually use diagrams, and just provide gentle nudges in one or the other direction where use is inconsistent.

I think this is also why so many people hate UML tooling - because it forces you to communicate in this strange dialect that is very different from how most of us communicate with diagrams, and that most people find awkward.

Re: Nomnoml

#57
post #51

The language is very, very nice. However, if I ran into this incidentally (not posted to HN for review), I would never use this. I'd see the lack of a github link on the top right, and assume it's a some kind of startup making some prototype hosted tool. The only way to find out this is open-source is to click "about," read to the third paragraph, see github mentioned, click through the link, and click on the license…

> However, if I ran into this incidentally (not posted to HN for review), I would never use this. I'd see the lack of a github link on the top right, and assume it's a some kind of startup making some prototype hosted tool.

Yeah, it's absolutely horrible when the GitHub link is in the bottom right rather than the top right. Completely unforgivable. Geez.

Do (Free|Net|Open)BSD and GNU tools qualify as open source? No GitHub link as far as the eye can see :)

Re: Nomnoml

#58
post #50

Getting a good layout is too dependent on the order of definition. I can see that becoming unsolvable for the user for large diagrams but seems ok for small ones. For example the following gives an ugly yet valid layout of the example: [more loot] no ->[ e] [ start] -> [ plunder] -> [ more loot] -> [start] [Pirate| [foul mouth] mischief| bawl | sing || yell | drink ] [ Marauder] Jolly;Sailor] [sailor]->[rum] [Pirate]…

edit: I thought that it goes top to down, but no, it determines order other ways. Original Pirate table: [Pirate| [beard]--[parrot] [beard]-:>[foul mouth] ] parent posts Pirate table [Pirate| [foul mouth] this is upside down. Defining beard and parrot the order we want them to appear doesn't help: [Pirate| [beard] [parrot] [foul mouth] [foul mouth] it is still upside down.

Thanks for treating this as a puzzle. I think it proves the point that you either need to reverse engineer the layout engine in your head or guess and check to get good layouts.

Re: Nomnoml

#59

These tools show up from time to time here, and I can appreciate the technical side of things and effort put into building the tool. However, I cannot imagine using something like this in practice - either at work or for my own uses. It's so much easier just to select, drag and drop graphical elements instead of spending time learning a specific markup language and typing everything out, hoping that the elements will…

Text-based versions are much better for accessibility. A screen reader or text to speech software can describe a textual representation of a diagram much better than your WebGL equivalent on a zoomable canvas.
Post reply on HN