Difference between revisions of "Talk:Benefit-risk assessment of fish and related policy options"

From Testiwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(About the graph)
m
Line 3: Line 3:
 
== About the graph ==
 
== About the graph ==
  
This causal chain graph is starting to expand to become hard to read. Dark blue boxes representing important nodes are a good idea, but are all the pale blue nodes really needed to give the perception about the issue. They might be leading the eye of the focus sometimes. For me example, causal chain of stress experieced by fish is becoming to be unnecessarily extensive and probably very hard to exploid when building the model. Idea: Could there be this extensive graph which covers about all the factors and then another graph, which includes only the essential nodes needed to form a picture (variables for the model) about the problem. In short, one conseptual graph (large), and then also the graph for modelling (variables able to be quantified).
+
Dark blue boxes representing important nodes (=variables) is a good idea, but if the number of pale blue nodes grows much in the future, the model could become hard to read. Could the colour be even fainter to highlight the variables used for modelling?
  
 
--[[User:Olli|Olli]] 08:48, 18 April 2007 (EEST)
 
--[[User:Olli|Olli]] 08:48, 18 April 2007 (EEST)

Revision as of 05:56, 18 April 2007

Maybe we could narrow down the topic more. By excluding microbiological risks, the topic could be like "Nutritional benefits & chemical risks of fish consumption and related policy options about using fish for human food". I think this topic sounds too plastic and we should work on this more, but this comment is just a starting point to discussions about issue. --Olli 10:45, 17 April 2007 (EEST)

About the graph

Dark blue boxes representing important nodes (=variables) is a good idea, but if the number of pale blue nodes grows much in the future, the model could become hard to read. Could the colour be even fainter to highlight the variables used for modelling?

--Olli 08:48, 18 April 2007 (EEST)