In a real DKR, a glossary like this would be linked on a number of
dimensions (as would all the DKR content). Each entry would be linked to all
occurrences of the word in the DKR content. Each of those links would be
rated based on relevance and "educational background requirement". Also,
there will be "dependency" threads running through the terms. The DKR will
even have links to the same term in DKRs covering other topics.
At this point, the only dimension that seems practical is attribution. I can
see trying to add some links to the transcripts of the colloquium sessions.
And the data/information/knowledge entries are simplified versions of what I
found in your meeting minutes in your 5/17 journal entry
As far as examples, I gave a few but I agree that this should be filled out.
My goal was a beginner's glossary. When presented with this material the
first time, I remember thinking I wish I had examples. Also, I intentionally
ordered the terms in a way that I thought would be useful for a person
unfamiliar with Doug's work.
As far as other dimensions, such as "nuance", I believe a DKR will have
multiple levels of glossary. Along the dimension of "depth" there would
exist a number of incrementally more detailed definitions of each term. Some
terms, for instance Knowledge Management, are the subject of entire books.
And yes, the definition of DKR is brief. If we could really define that in
simple terms, we would have our requirements spec., wouldn't we? :-)
From: Rod Welch [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: [unrev-II] Glossary - just breaking the ice on this task
Great start on a big job. What do you think about providing links to
sources for attribution, and examples to illustrate meaning, application,
nuance. DKR needs some work..
Bill Bearden wrote:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 02 2000 - 06:19:28 PDT