This is the best solution I have seen so far. It is worth doing. Vince
On Feb 28, 2009, at 4:48 AM, Peter Bowers wrote: > On Saturday, February 28, 2009 1:24 AM Petko Yotov wrote: >> On Friday 27 February 2009 22:21:02 Peter Bowers wrote: >>> Almost any of the ideas that have been proposed would work -- one >>> just >> needs >>> to be "appointed" and then implemented. >> >> ... >> >> Sorry. Isn't this quite complicated? Are there some benefits over >> something >> most basic and simplest like: >> >> on a recipe ratings page (Recipe-Users?): asterisk, comment, >> signature : >> >> * I use it. [[~Petko]] (datestamp) >> * I reviewed the recipe and I endorse it. [[~Pm]] (datestamp) >> * Excellent recipe, I used it before (now I only have the simple >> auth, >> no AuthUser, so I no longer need this recipe.) [[~Dfaure]] >> (datestamp) >> >> ? >> >> There is a comment capability, there are links to the profiles. A >> link in >> the >> recipeinfo block could be in [[Recipe]], on the same line as >> Discussion: [[Recipe-Talk]], [[Recipe-Users]] > > FANTASTIC! Let's do it! Simple, effective. The only thing it > misses is > some sort of numeric indicator on the recipe page itself, but > that's a small > price... (If the maintainer wants a numeric indicator he can > periodically > manually count the users and put a number on the page next to the > link.) > >> It is less CPU-intensive for the server than opening all profile >> pages to >> find >> and extract comments in PTVs. Orders of magnitude less CPU intensive. > > Technically I believe with both the link= and with the straight- > text search > only the .pageindex will be accessed during the search itself. > Then only > for profile pages which are found will we have to open to access > the profile > pages to find out the content of the PTV. But that's a minor > technicality > -- I'm fine with the simple solution above. > >> One potential problem I see with such an implementation is that the >> Recipe-Users page might become another place to chat about the >> recipe, >> which >> it is not intended to be. Like, a user adds a negative comment, >> the author >> replies and a conversation goes on. But, we could manually move >> the "conversation" to the Recipe-Talk page, leaving only the first >> comment >> (the user is free to change his comment at a later moment.) > > This sounds like life-on-a-wiki (the kind of thing any wiki user > deals with > all the time since we're dealing with an intentionally low- > structure data > store) and certainly not a reason to reject the solution. > > The other advantage of this solution is that it is an easier > solution to > attach a form later if we decide that is desirable... > > Can we get some more comments to see if there is a consensus in the > making? > > -Peter > > > _______________________________________________ > pmwiki-users mailing list > pmwiki-users@pmichaud.com > http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users > _______________________________________________ pmwiki-users mailing list pmwiki-users@pmichaud.com http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users