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
Problem Tree (AKA Current Reality Tree) syntax RFC
The purpose of this issue is to gather feedback and counterproposals for TOC-Lang's Problem Tree syntax. We are currently in a prototyping phase where it is safe to break compatibility, so this is the best time to shape our notation for the future.
Please comment your thoughts, thanks!
Entities
Condition == A condition, potentially changeable, that may be in a causal relationship with other nodes
Undesirable Effect (UDE) == a condition we don't like
Desirable Effect (DE) == a condition we like
Fact Of Life (FOL) == a condition we do not believe we can change
Nodes are Condition (C) by default, other types are marked with class: as shown below
Relationships
There are causal relationship between conditions, which can take these forms
Single Cause == Simply something like "A causes result"
Joint Cause == An AND relationship like "result <- A && B"
Disjoint Cause == An OR relationship, implicitly represented with two statements "A -> result" "B -> result"
Currently there is an asymmetry on how AND and OR relationships are represented. That could be resolved by introducing an OR operator, but it would open the door for more complex statements "(A and B) or A1 cause result" - grouping and operator precedence would be needed.
Example Tree
bad: Bad user experience {
class: UDE
}
cluttered: Cluttered interface
bad <- cluttered
ux: Low investment in UX design
features: Many features added
cluttered <- ux && features
salesPressure: "Pressure to increase sales"
enterpriseRequests: "Enterprise contracts are easier to close by promising new features" {
class: FOL
}
features <- salesPressure && enterpriseRequests
increasedSales: Increased sales {
class: DE
}
increasedSales <- features && enterpriseRequests
Check src/assets/grammars/toc-lang.peggy for the grammar specification.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Historical note. The RC1 syntax shown below is now abandoned in favor of RC2 patterned after d2lang.
UDE bad is "Bad user experience"
C cluttered is "Cluttered interface"
cluttered causes bad
C ux is "Low investment in UX design"
C features is "Many features added"
ux and features cause cluttered
C salesPressure is "Pressure to increase sales"
FOL enterpriseRequests is "Enterprise contracts are easier to close by promising new features"
salesPressure and enterpriseRequests cause features
DE increasedSales is "Increased sales"
features and enterpriseRequests cause increasedSales
Problem Tree (AKA Current Reality Tree) syntax RFC
The purpose of this issue is to gather feedback and counterproposals for TOC-Lang's Problem Tree syntax. We are currently in a prototyping phase where it is safe to break compatibility, so this is the best time to shape our notation for the future.
Please comment your thoughts, thanks!
Entities
Nodes are Condition (C) by default, other types are marked with
class:
as shown belowRelationships
There are causal relationship between conditions, which can take these forms
Currently there is an asymmetry on how AND and OR relationships are represented. That could be resolved by introducing an OR operator, but it would open the door for more complex statements "(A and B) or A1 cause result" - grouping and operator precedence would be needed.
Example Tree
Check
src/assets/grammars/toc-lang.peggy
for the grammar specification.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: