[WriterOfMinds]

For multiple parents, "up" could mean parent and "down" could mean child. When dragging, the thing would move as if it was projected on a sphere.

That's what I was mainly getting at with my question about multiple inheritance ... if a circle has multiple parents, how does it get drawn?  Would it and its children be duplicated in more than one place, or ... ?

May I ask would this be compatible with Acuitas' knowledge base?

Possibly.  Acuitas' knowledge is more of a sprawling directed graph than a collection of trees, though, so I wonder if it would be presented well by this visualization.

[Zero]

Thinking about it, as it is today, "inside" means parent and "outside" means child. So after all, multiple inheritance should mean "multiple insides". I don't know how it would translate visually in 2D though. I guess 2D is inherently reaching its limits here.



  Insane stuff.

A 2D interface showing only "slices" of data would be hard to use.

[ivan.moony]

... if a circle has multiple parents, how does it get drawn?  Would it and its children be duplicated in more than one place, or ... ?

What are even the options?

[WriterOfMinds]

One approach would be replication ... drawing a copy of the child circle next to each of its parents. Another would be to draw the child circle only once, but get it to touch or connect with each of the parents. I think Zero is suggesting some sort of folding or curvature through 3D space to accomplish this.  It sounds hard.

[ivan.moony]

Another would be to draw the child circle only once, but get it to touch or connect with each of the parents.

Possible, but UI gets complicated up when introducing new kind of links. How about simply drawing another, inexisting child, to label it "parents", and to put all the multiple parent references in orbit around it?

I think Zero is suggesting some sort of folding or curvature through 3D space to accomplish this.  It sounds hard.

My brain gets intricated when thinking about higher dimensions 

[ranch vermin]

Look up fractal compression,  but it doesnt look that helpful to me,   but I dont want to share my actual idea because its too precious to me.

But I will say this->

If I were to do video compression with fractals,   id put the next image inside of the last image, and would come to a really large picture at the end.

Putting things inside things, so it comes out in a zoom.

Interesting stuff!

[ranch vermin]

Just think, if you had a scale invarient key,  you could use this to capture the up close parts to the distant parts that are similar to it,  and use the exact same photo patch for both.

This works i think,  it was a part of my automatic 3d system,  and it would also do this "scope like" compression,  of seeing the same thing over and over and at different scales.

I know alot more too,  but I have to keep it secret.  But fractals are really amazing.


[edit]
here i found this.

[ivan.moony]

Rotating 4D cube:

[keghn]

Fractal music: explore musical patterns: 

https://www.raspberrypi.org/magpi/fractal-music-explore-musical-patterns/ 

[WriterOfMinds]

How about simply drawing another, inexisting child, to label it "parents", and to put all the multiple parent references in orbit around it?

So references to extra parents would be drawn like additional children (or grandchildren)? In a sense that inverts the organizational hierarchy, but it might work out just fine.

[ivan.moony]

Just polishing some static rotation details. Should be better organized now.

I think I'll save some time for the next week to get into dynamics.

[ranch vermin]

sorry for bringing up all this data stuff about fractals...   i can see your just making some nice patterns,  i always overblow things woops.

[ivan.moony]

It is really nothing complicated. First I range over orbit circles. If a circle is bigger than 5 pixels, I draw surrounding bounds and step into recursion. If it is less than 5 pixels, I just draw bounds and skip to the next circle. What will be finally drawn inside circles (as data) will completely depend upon end programmer, I'll just scale it to fit bounds.

[ivan.moony]

WriterOfMinds, you asked about showing multiple parents.

I've been composing some combinations, and l think the first image could be some solution.

The second image is there just for its aesthetic value, magnification decay could be too big to hold anything useful, but I find the pattern beautiful.

In both cases it is the same algorithm, but with different magnification decays.

[ranch vermin]

beautiful piece there,  maybe it could be a basis for a game.   when I do my 3d fractals I could use them as a terrain for a wargame.