Cytoscape Wiki|
← Revision 12 as of 2006-08-31 18:34:20
Size: 2141
Comment:
|
← Revision 13 as of 2006-09-01 11:49:22 →
Size: 2257
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 35: | Line 35: |
| * Plan for reducing the number of libraries Cytoscape depends on e.g. refactoring to remove dependence on Piccolo |
Hackathon discussion issues
GINY Refactoring
- Edge IDs should be addressable, just like node IDs
- We should ensure that all of Cytoscape currently assumes directed edges - how/when do we deal with undirected edges?
GINY metanode refactoring: remove meta methods - all functionality will be present in the metanode/group API. This will significantly simplify the GINY API and data structure allowing developers to be more confident that their algorithms will work on CyNetwork in general.
Refactor the GINY interface/inheritance architecture: e.g. should we encapsulate GINY in CyNetwork? See ["CyNode Identification"]
- Clean up depracated methods
- More Unit tests for giny to help us make these changes
Clean up Cytoscape class – duplicated methods in CyNetwork vs. Cytoscape class and the general bloat of the Cytoscape class.
VizMapper/Filtering redesign
- see ["VizMapUI"]
Technology sharing with InfoVis Toolkit
see ["InfoVis Toolkit"]
Integration of Hyperedges and Metanodes APIs into the core
- Hyperedges
- Metanodes
Graph Layout Architecture and Features
- breaking out common controls from algorithms
- can all algorithms be made to operate on a subset of network?
- controlling bounds of layout
Event handling
- right now components that do mouse event and mouse motion event handling can clobber each other. Do we need an overall event architecture that components can plug into?
- right now event declaration and listener store implementation is still spread out over a wide swath of the Cytoscape code. Should we consolidate into one event package?
Uncategorized
- What features should be in 3.0? There has been some brief discussion that the addition of metanode (group) and hyperedge concepts to the core (including some support for these in the UI) would qualify for 3.0 status.
- How can plugins know which attributes are relevant to which network?
- How should we deal with name clashes for cyattributes? Can we somehow detect name clashes and automate fixing these? Is this mainly a plugin issue?
- Plan for reducing the number of libraries Cytoscape depends on e.g. refactoring to remove dependence on Piccolo