Re: New release of bookmark patch

[Beartooth <btth adelphia net>]

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004, Peter Harvey wrote:

> What I've tried to capture with my bookmarks patch is a way of 
> organising bookmarks automatically using some of the ideas of FCA 
> (formal concept analysis). It relies solely on the information provided 
> in the groupings of bookmarks (basically, what topics each bookmark is 
> associated with).

	Sounds interesting. Is there a good intro for oafish dolts? (I 
took a degree in math once -- long ago & far away ...)

> You say that you know how you want your bookmarks to "look", but my
> patch doesn't let you specify exactly how they should look. You are
> allowed to specify the way you group your bookmarks, and it generates
> the "look" automatically. My patch won't allow a user to manipulate
> minor nitpicky details like "this should be a submenu, not a subdivion",
> or "the News topic always comes before Entertainment,
> alphabet-be-damned".

	I expressed it badly. I don't mean appearance per se, but 
arrangement -- which ones go into which places. I'm not sure whether it's 
the same; I don't want an alphabetic arrangement, though, but one where I 
can work my way down, without knowing names till I see them, from the 
outermost layer of hierarchy, if that's an appropriate concept. So for 
instance I want a grouping of miscellaneous linux pages; one devoted to 
particular distros; ones inside/below that for Fedora and YellowDog; ones 
inside/below each of those for software, and on to browsers, etc.

> Is there a good chance that your organisational idiosyncrasies are
> present in the way that you group your bookmarks? If they are, then
> there is a good chance my bookmarks patch will generate a bookmark menu
> you would at least be happy with. If not, then I may have to abandon the
> idea of a universally satisfying bookmarks system. :)

	I *think* we're on close enough wavelengths to be making progress.

	Marginalium: one old trick for arranging any personal info 
collection is to use mnemonics meant to amuse -- i.e., amuse the 
individual making and using the system, whether or not any of them amuses 
anyone else. I use that a lot, and suspect others do. Dumb example: filing 
certain kinds of info about a disliked boss under a private and derisive 
nickname for that boss, or an anagram or acronym of such a nickname.

--
Beartooth Implacable, curmudgeonly codger learning linux
Remember I know very little of what I'm asking about!