You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Sometimes there's no one perfect tool for building a selection. Users are likely to want to combine methods from multiple builders. We should create a "combination builder" (name is up for debate). This would consist mostly of a dropdown selection of the existing builders that the user has created, with some number of mathematical set operations (probably union, intersection, and difference).
We could build a single set "expression" where the user fills in the sets (builders) that they wish to operate on. Something like:
(A ∪ B ∪ ...) - (C ∪ D ∪ ...)
Where the user provides their existing builders as values of A, B, C, D etc. We could also provide a toggle for Union/Intersection for each parenthesized expression, like Petscan does. This is probably the easiest to explain:
Include [all articles | articles that are shared] between [ A | B | C], but exclude [all articles | articles that are shared] between [ A | B | C].
An interesting question is if we want to let combinator builders themselves be combined. Conceptually and architecturally there's no problem with it, but it might be a case of "handing the user a footgun" where they create a complex chain of combined builders and get frustrated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sometimes there's no one perfect tool for building a selection. Users are likely to want to combine methods from multiple builders. We should create a "combination builder" (name is up for debate). This would consist mostly of a dropdown selection of the existing builders that the user has created, with some number of mathematical set operations (probably union, intersection, and difference).
We could build a single set "expression" where the user fills in the sets (builders) that they wish to operate on. Something like:
(A ∪ B ∪ ...) - (C ∪ D ∪ ...)
Where the user provides their existing builders as values of A, B, C, D etc. We could also provide a toggle for Union/Intersection for each parenthesized expression, like Petscan does. This is probably the easiest to explain:
An interesting question is if we want to let combinator builders themselves be combined. Conceptually and architecturally there's no problem with it, but it might be a case of "handing the user a footgun" where they create a complex chain of combined builders and get frustrated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: