![]() I think if I could create multiple parents I might be able to mode easily link them to meet the three distinct use cases above.Īdditionally, I echo the comments of many other posters who request "orphan" nodes. The only way I can see to do this is to individually link each data item to each process. I want to find where each data item is used. In fact, that's a key goal of the exercise. I want to show how the data connects to the processes. The 3rd reason for commenting is that I want to connect the two sides of my map. Again, in MindMup I create one hierarchical relationship and manually connect the other nodes with no way to indicate the parents are all equal. ![]() In this scenario, I have a single child (a document) with multiple parents. Each path is a little different but they share common elements and all end up at the same place- a common child. ![]() ![]() In just one example, there are many ways to create a particular document (web, email, fax, phone call). The 2nd reason for commenting is in the process flows. But I haven't found a way to indicate parents or children. I can do this in MindMup as long as create one primary hierarchial relationship and then manually draw a line between all the other nodes. In a many-to-many data relationship, there are, by definition, multiple parents and children. 1-many relationships, though, are clumsy, and many-to-many relationships are one reasons why I'm writing this comment. MinMup works pretty well for the data map as long as the relationships are 1-1. I'm using MindMup to create a data map of some key business processes, and in parallel, map those same high level processes. I'm new to both mind mapping and MindMup. (Of course, this would need some form of assigning and saving roles in one hierarchy mode while viewing it in another, but let's not discuss solutions immediately.) Switching between 'pedigree' and 'flat' modes, you can then slowly build and rebuild connections between concept nodes. One way to do this, could be to offer different hierarchical structures as templates that can be imposed on a graph, or sections of it (and sure that can be helpful!). I would try keep that while implementing more freedom to choose one hierarchy or another. At time, that actually helps getting your ideas clearer (from misty and multi-rooted to something resembling a taxonomy). That said, there is an interesting interaction between one's personal, momentary 'need' to just connect a to b without hierarchy, and a tool that asks you to impose some hierarchical formatting, like parent-child. Ideas, associations and emergent structure (= a mind map) hardly ever follow one predictable hierarchical structure - at least mine don't (I'm in both arts, design and science). Is there any news on this, did it get out of review and into some form of development? I think it's the most important improvement to the application, by far. ![]() The lack of this feature is the main reason why I stick to a whiteboard in mapping out my own research ideas I work with students to build the map and to put the connection in between the central ideas from the beginning would be to give the "answer" away. When you are trying to work out the relation between the 3 main ideas working on different maps makes it harder to hold all the ideas in your head at once.įYI I use it in tertiary education which is delivered online (and so a whiteboard is not an option). To be concrete I want to be able to start with say three main ideas which are not currently connected to each other and which the standard heirchacical trees can come off. Porter's "pending" suggestion is a good way around it using the current structure but it would be nice to be able to avoid this and it does force a spatial organisation onto the ideas that might end up not fitting the structure of the ideas being mapped. I just wanted to add a vote for the ability to start with a few separate parents on the one map which you know will end up being related but the purpose of the map is to work the nature of the relationship. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |