Re: [Demexp-dev] Current status on demexp development & issues on delegation

[David MENTRE]

Hello,

address@hidden writes:

> I'm ready to meet and I'm available on wednesday evening, thursday evening,
> saturday afternon.

We have indeed met last Wednesday. Please find below the result of our
discussion. 

> I think it would be good to meet on a regular basis because even if we think
> we have nothing to discuss, there is alway some issues on. I also know some
> people who would like to participate to such meetings. This could be a way
> to get some people involved to help us.

We have agreed to make a meeting on a regular basis. If you want to come
at next meeting, just tell us.

Meeting report:

 - we have agreed to freeze the current development code, make a stable
   branch of it (demexp--stable--0.2) and start a new development branch
   (demexp--development--0.3);

 - we have agreed to redesign and re-implement the classification and
   delegation sub-systems (and of course, all parts using them). You'll
   find below a quick specification of the new sub-systems.


Second design of delegation and classification sub-systems
==========================================================

Version: 1.0 / 2004-03-19

* on each question is added a set of tags. Each tag is a keyword
  describing a theme, a domain, a subject of which the question is
  related to (e.g. Rennes, Ecology, Democracy). 

* tags are translated into several languages.

* tags are added to a question by a group of people recognized by the
  demexp system.

* to each question is added a tag that is equal to the question
  description itself. 

* participants delegate a tag to a given delegate. So delegation is only
  done tag per tag.

* when a tag is given to a delegate, the delegate vote weight is
  increased by one. All participant votes on questions having the
  delegated tag are canceled.

* in turn, a delegate can (i) vote or (ii) delegate a tag to another
  delegate.

* in case of conflict (tag A delegated to Da, tag B to Db and question Q
  contains tags A and B):

  - the initial delegation is frozen (i.e. suspended)

  - the conflict is stored

  - when the participant or delegate at the origin of conflict
    reconnects, he solves the conflict by giving an order between tags A
    and B (thus one of the two delegates will be chosen for question Q)

  - delegation is unfrozen and the initial vote is taken into account

* tag ordering is always transitive: A>B & B>C => A>C

* issues to take care of:

  - loop in tag ordering: A>B>C>A. In case of loop detection, the
    conflicting order is refused.

  - loop in delegation: 
       A     A     A
     P--->D1--->D2--->D1

    In case of loop detection, the delegation is refused.

  - addition of a tag on a question can create delegation conflicts

Fred and Félix could you review this spec and check that we have an
agreement on them?

Yours,
d.
-- 
 David Mentré <address@hidden>