I don't think we should get into that mentality. Instead of making an arbitrary distinction about the "main" author, I think we should simply consider all authors equal.
On Sep 10, 2008, at 10:02 AM, Chris J. Davis wrote: > Is there some reason why we shouldn't be keeping this info in the > postinfo table? I would imagine that there will always be a major > author, and then authors who are assisting. In this scenario the > main author would be stored as we do now, and the assisting authors > would be stored in post info records. > > Just a thought. > > On Sep 10, 2008, at 6:30 AM, Arthus Erea wrote: > >> >> On Sep 10, 2008, at 6:57 AM, Chris Meller wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 5:00 AM, drzax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Good idea, but how do you capture the data? Is it simply anyone >>> who's >>> ever edited the post becomes an author? I suspect that wouldn't be >>> suitable. If I was editor of a multi-author blog, chances are I'd be >>> making edits to submitted articles, but I wouldn't want to be >>> counted >>> as an author. >>> >>> Maybe something like Wikimedia's 'this is a minor edit'? 'Add me >>> as an author'? *shrug* >>> >> >> Yea, that's what I was thinking. >> >> For the time being, I think we should just change the data >> structure and ignore the interface. (ie, store the relationships in >> the new table, but still only keep 1 author per post) >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
