On Saturday, 24 January 2009 11:28 AM, Patrick R. Michaud <[email protected]> wrote: >On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 09:41:42AM +1300, [email protected] wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 06:02:43PM +1300, John Rankin wrote: >> >> - whichever term is chosen, I think ~~~~ may be a simplification >> >> too far; I would really like to see a comment associated with >> >> the name (rejecting any comments that contain a url) >> > >... > >So, ignore the 1..5 scale in SimpleRating, pretend it's just >"+1". Then the pages end up with a markup like: > > !! Supporters > > * [[~Pm]] +1 > I support this recipe because it's well written and > the author bribed me to say this. > * [[~John]] +1 > Great recipe. > * [[~Sally]] +1 > * Bob +1 > I don't have/want a profile page, but I support this >recipe. > >There are two reasons for keeping the "+1" in place: (1) it gives >us a way for markup to distinguish a supporter from an ordinary bullet >item, and (2) it opens the door to allow a +2 sometime in the >future. There have been many situations when I've found it to >be very handy to differentiate "support" and "strongly >support". > >So again, I'm looking more at "mechanics of how we make this work"
What about using term/definition markup for this? And including a "supporter date". This could give: : [[~Pm]] 2005-01-21 : I support this recipe because it's well written and the author bribed me to say this. : [[~John]] 2006-03-15 : Great recipe. : [[~Sally]] 2006-06-05 : ''no comment given'' : Bob 2007-09-30 : I don't have/want a profile page, but I support this recipe. : [[~Tom]] 2008-12-25 : I tested this thoroughly and couldn't break it. : ''anonymous'' 2009-01-01 : I have been using this for several months and really like it. There are pro's and con's for having a +1: + the reasons given, which are good ones - using definition markup and a date may be sufficient to distinguish the entry from a regular term/definition - leaving it out now doesn't stop us adding it later and it would allow a later modification to give people the option to leave a comment, but not a rating If it's included now, why a "+" prefix rather than just 1? Alternatively, why +1 rather than + on its own? Perhaps the best argument for *not* including a +1 is that it then means if it's introduced later, people can have an option to leave a comment, but not a rating. I don't think supporters should be forced to rate a recipe. If +1 means "I have not given this recipe a rating", the only reason to have it now is to create a unique markup expression. If it's required to distinguish the entry from ordinary list items, could it be just a + so it can in future mean "unrated" i.e. not the same as a +1? This would give: : [[~Pm]] 2005-01-21 + : I support this recipe because it's well written and the author bribed me to say this. Should anonymous supporters be accepted? If supporters can choose not to have a link to a profile page, will the form include a "Link my name to my profile" checkbox? I wonder if being able to support anonymously would be sufficient: - if the author field is filled in, it is linked to the profile - if it's blank, it is recorded as an anonymous supporter This would be consistent with how the edit form works. Let's come back to the word later -- once we finalise the mechanics. >... > >Pm > Hope this helps JR -- John Rankin Affinity Limited T 64 4 495 3737 F 64 4 473 7991 021 RANKIN [email protected] www.affinity.co.nz _______________________________________________ pmwiki-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
