Hi Jorge,

Boost may not be useful anymore as Space Syntax adopted many
geometrical features. From recent advances, I think only the
continuity maps are still purely topological. Therefore, some sort of
GIS-like library is necessary not only to create an weighted graph but
also to recover geometrical or other data properties in real time.

About your question of target, from my experience a broader
distribution of space syntax tool benefits mainly undergraduate and
master students. Therefore, the target is a misture of
'researcher-user' and 'designer-user'. In this case, more than the
tool itself, the documentation and training comes at the top.
Distributing a tool without this could even make damage to the field.

Best Regards,
Lucas Figueiredo



On 27/06/07, Jorge Gil <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> If we consider the creation of a core space syntax algorithms library,
> could it be part of the open-source Boost project?
>
> http://www.boost.org/libs/libraries.htm#Algorithms
>
> Boost already has many other libraries including a generic graph library
> and the licence is very open.
> Of course we could create an independent project for this library, but
> this way we would also bring space syntax algorithms to a wider
> community of developers.
>
> How could this benefit the space syntax open-source software project?
> Would this be useful to other naturally emergent variations of space
> syntax software (from the need to understand by developing)?
>
> Jorge
>
> _________________
>
> Jorge Gil
> Associate, Research & Development
>
> SPACE SYNTAX
>
> D          +44  (0) 20 7422 7611
>
> [log in to unmask]
> www.spacesyntax.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: S. N.C. Dalton [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 26 June 2007 11:19
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Syntax2D Licensing
>
> Intreasting
>
> this would suggest that we make a command line utility that say read in
> axial maps/DXFs GIS what ever and produced tables of numbers that could
> be re-attached. Then if someone wants to play with the algorithms they
> can play but in a way that only other experts could re-use.
>
> The user interfaced based software would then be separate based on the
> 'core' computations and the average architect/student/researher who
> wants to try out space syntax can down load the software and then
> operate in confidence.
>
> interesting model of development/distrbutioin and one we might want to
> consider.
>
> sheep
>
>
> On 26 Jun 2007, at 10:28, Jorge Gil wrote:
>
> > We can look at the model of Computer Fluid Dynamics (CFD), another
> > analytical and simulation based scientific field. Many CFD codes are
> > available and open source while commercial CFD applications are
> > extremely expensive.
> >
> > The CFD codes are simply different implementations of different
> > algorithms developed through academic research and supported by papers
>
> > explaining and demonstrating the results. Anyone is free to adopt and
> > adapt these codes for whatever purpose as the codes by themselves
> > don't make up a software. Most of these are libraries for open source
> > platforms favoured by academics written in C, C++ or Fortran, with a
> > simple command line interface, restricted in terms of inputs/ outputs
> > and installation is elaborate.
> > In recent years some open source application projects have been
> > started and we can look how they are doing. But some are not live yet
> > after several years or have stopped activity...
> >
> > The commercial CFD applications add an enormous range of features and
> > functionality that is of no interest for researchers to develop, but
> > is essential for users who want to apply the CFD analysis to their
> > projects. These developments make the bulk of the software development
>
> > and aren't open source as they are "accessory" to the science itself.
> > We're talking about importing and exporting a variety of file formats,
>
> > displaying and editing the base models, displaying results in richly
> > visual and interactive ways, providing technical support, training and
>
> > documentation.
> > Furthermore, because we're dealing with analytical and simulation
> > software, the providers expect a certain level of expertise and
> > understanding of the science by end users, and training using the
> > software is mandatory. As Alan mentions, the results of these
> > applications may not be immediately obvious and the preparation of the
>
> > models is extremely delicate. Just because the user doesn't understand
>
> > the results it doesn't mean the calculations are wrong, and if the
> > user blindly accepts the results as correct it can have serious
> > consequences of which the software developers don't want to be liable
> > for.
> >
> >
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> > _________________
> >
> > Jorge Gil
> > Associate, Research & Development
> >
> > SPACE SYNTAX
> >
> > D          +44  (0) 20 7422 7611
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> > www.spacesyntax.com
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alan Penn
> > Sent: 26 June 2007 09:31
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Syntax2D Licensing
> >
> >>
> >> As I understand it, as a user of open source software (such as
> >> Firefox
> >
> >> and OpenOffice), this is not a problem because there is version
> >> control and measures are taken to ensure to code does not "fork" into
>
> >> different and potentially incompatible versions.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Anzir Boodoo
> >
> > I think that this is the point. To maintain consistency and ease of
> > use of the user-interface as well as to maintain the validity of the
> > code requires investment of time and effort. Commercial organisations
> > put this investment in because by making use of a large number of
> > unpaid enthusiasts they get benefit of the occasional good idea and
> > innovation.
> > I suspect that the lion's share of hacker code is just thrown away. In
>
> > addition they take advantage of a kind of 'ideological' brand - the
> > open source movement - which is a powerful loyalty marketing device
> > and against which their most powerful competition (eg. Microsoft)
> > cannot compete.
> >
> > The point is that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
> >
> > Now this is fine for a web-browser, or a wordprocessor, or even for a
> > GIS.
> > These are applications which work or don't work in a very obvious way.
>
> > I type a weblink into Firefox and either I get to the webpage and it
> > displays, or I don't. The mess the hacker makes of the code will be
> > pretty obvious if it matters. But take Sheep's example of analytic
> > software. Here the whole point of opening up the source is to allow
> > people to try out entirely new things where by definition one doesn't
> > know what a 'correct' result will look like. Certainly the individual
> > with the new idea might, but if they get it wrong would it be possible
>
> > for a centralised 'version control' vetting group to know? I suspect
> > not without a serious layer of meta data associated with code stating
> > what the intention was in very precise terms, and then a large
> > investment of time and effort on the part of that group to validate
> > the code and - a point I have made before - the empirical usefulness
> > of the idea itself in helping to explain anything about the way the
> > world works.
> >
> > Taken all in all, I wonder whether the open source model works for
> > this kind of analytic software development - there must be examples
> > from other fields of science. Does anyone know of them?
> >
> > Alan
>


-- 
Lucas Figueiredo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lucasfigueiredo/

Mindwalk
http://www.mindwalk.com.br