On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Right, which is why I propose multiple exclusive categories, instead > of all these tedious binary choices. > >> Moreover, to get #5, I'd have to do even more work, and maintain a >> "non-comics - close friends" filter. I don't, making fill-in reading >> after a catchup far more of a chore. > > Oh, right. Add to previous: User can specify group default for friend > add. So when you add a new watchee, you *have* to assign them to one > of Close Friends, Loud Friends, Comic, or Everybody Else -- and if you > don't specify, it defaults to adding them to, say, Everybody Else (or > whichever one you picked as the default for the group).
Unfortunately, exclusive categories would break some of the reading-list-filter strategies that I use, so I am really disinclined to like this suggestion as-is. I would dearly love to be able to do Boolean filtering with my custom groups (at least reading if not trust). I would completely support a user interface in which you could optionally force exclusive categories, and would absolutely love a user interface that would highlight users that were not in groups on demand. (A filters management client? Using a client would enable many fun things that might possibly be too processing-intensive to be viable server-side, and it's not unheard-of for LJ, see: Semagic.) -Azz _______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
