[Textop] DGP

[Larry Sanger]

Matthias and all,

I'm quite excited, really, that the pilot project for the DGP is now
starting up.

> You convinced me that it is beter is a node is a bigger set
> of text it is
> much more readable, enjoyable. So I summarize our plan to see if we
> really agree.

Glad to hear it!

> 1) A node in the DGP project is a list of arguments.

Yes.

> 2) In the list of the arguments we insert the description of the
> argument, quotations or a link to the collation project chunk
> if it exists.

Well, the node, or "debate summary" as I have been calling it (feel free
to propose a pithier name), is primarily made up of arguments.  So the
summary contains arguments, not (if this is different) *descriptions* of
arguments.  As to quotations--I'd prefer not to have them.  Let us be
focused.  Again, as with Wikipedia, it is very important that we focus
on the precise requirements of the resource.  Quotations would be nice,
but if we add quotations, we'll start adding all sorts of other things.
Maybe we'll add them later, but first let's get the core of the debate
summaries correctly prototyped.

Also, links to collation project nodes are in order.  That's pretty
unobtrusive, and helpful, too.  I can easily see a list of resources at
the bottom of a debate summary, as well as footnotes (see my latest
version of the footnote policy, which I updated this morning in light of
your remarks on the wiki).

> 3) If an argument is itself a bigger thesis, which is debated then we
> create a new node for it.

Yes, if I understand you correctly.

> 4) There are nodes for debated questions, which link to at least 2
> possible thesis node, which are in the debate for this question.

I'm not sure quite what you mean here.  If you are saying that there
should be separate pages for each position on a question (as you
suggested on the wiki), then I disagree.  It is better that we have
competing arguments set side-by-side.  This enables the user to compare
arguments more easily.

> 5) We can create links from each argument to counter arguments to of
> the other side.

Well, such links are not necessary if the arguments are actually sitting
right next to each other on the page.

There are other essential aspects of the project (e.g., active debate
summaries should be placed in the outline), but these are mostly correct
in my opinion.

> I am not sure if you want separate nodes for the question and
> for the 2
> theses, or do you want them all on one node?

So, one node.

> About the prototype Wiki. We started now work there, but I have 1
> concern: The title of the Wiki is Text Outline Project. The
> current content
> is also oriented to the Collation Project. You can not see
> that there are
> 2 projects inside.

I will add some more introductory text to the front page of the wiki.
Tell me what you think of the changes.

--Larry