h a l f b a k e r yMake mine a double.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
The way we address particular posts now is to address
the
poster's name and do that weird double slash thing on
either
side to show what you're talking about. However this is
time
consuming and confusing as you still often have to refer
back the the original post to get context.
This
idea is to have a place marker that would hold your
place
after a particular post that you wanted to address and
give
you time to write it keeping some kind of chronological
order
in the annotation list.
This way, if somebody wrote about a hedgehog calling it
an
ouchmouse and then there's five posts about orbital
mechanics, your post doesn't respond to:
"As seen in the equation v = SQRT(G * Mcentral / R), the
mass
of the central body (earth) and the radius of the orbit
affect
orbital speed...etc"
with:
"What's an ouchmouse?"
Causing confusion and consternation.
Ouchmouse
https://goo.gl/images/NQ6jX2
[doctorremulac3, Jan 28 2019]
OK, this is the idea.
Post_20Three_20Dots...ace_20In_20A_20Post
Notexactlyl's with my dot addition. [doctorremulac3, Jan 28 2019]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
It might be better just to have annotations automatically
numbered, consecutively, at the time of annotating. The
numbering would need to be static, so that if someone
deletes an anno, the other numbering doesn't shift up
immediately. |
|
| |
Well, this was specifically inspired by my asking a question
that you had already answered. Would that work? You'd still
have to go back and say "OK, this number is before that
number..." and do math which causes head ouches. |
|
| |
Might even throw in that little flashy dots thing telling
everybody: "Back off everybody! Megatron9000 (or whoever)
is typing another awesome anno!" |
|
| |
IMHO, the "tree" style prevalent at other commentable sites
is cumbersome. The "straight chronological" style we have
here is generally easy to use and follow; and if we have to
do a little extra to refer to each other, so be it.
Although [MaxwellBuchanan]s numbering idea would help, as
you could simply refer to the number of an anno instead,
especially if you wish to refer to more than one anno at
once. |
|
| |
No, I hate that tree style as well. This would just be a
placeholder so your anno would appear right after the anno
you were responding to even if several other annos were
entered before you hit [OK] on yours. |
|
| |
//your anno would appear right after the anno you were
responding to even if several other annos were entered
before you hit [OK] on yours.// But, in general, most
annotations are responding to earlier annotations. So your
annotation would displace (to further down the page) other
annotations responding to the same one. And then if
someone _else_ wanted to respond, it would mess things up
again. It's a queueing problem. We're good at this. |
|
| |
Others would tag their place in the queue as well but
they'd all be below the one they're responding to, first
come first serve. This is just to keep all the little sub
conversations that happen here together so they can all be
read at once. |
|
| |
Of course if you're just making a general comment or
starting a new point, you'd just annotate as you usually do.
This [CLICK TO REPLY TO THIS ANNOTATION] button would
only hold your place if you wanted it at a specific position,
namely right after a particular post. |
|
| |
This would work if you came along late in the conversation
as well and found a post you wanted to respond to. |
|
| |
So a particular comment might trigger most of the
additional comments in a post, as the conversation sort of
does now, but if you weren't interested in that little sub
conversation, you could just move on. |
|
| |
There would be a little place marker too. Just a line
denoting the starting comment and the last comment on
the list so you could see where the sub conversation starts
and stops. |
|
| |
No, no, now you've changed your tune again. If you come
along late, too bad. I see this as ONLY to hold you as "Next"
while you are typing, NOT to "insert" a new comment further
up the comment-stream. It's a "take a number" like at a
clinic. You can only ever add a comment at the bottom of
the stream, ordered as from when you START (click
"annotate") instead of when you finish typing and click "OK".
"Click to reply to this annotation" will make a mess (eg.
pretty much any other commentable site...). |
|
| |
Well, it could be either I suppose. |
|
| |
I like the idea of being able to read one
conversation all together though. Add on to it etc. |
|
| |
The only disadvantage of being able to add to
earlier conversations is nobody would see it unless
they were looking for it since the way we do it now
is to just look at the last comments. |
|
| |
But just the placeholder would be better than
nothing I suppose. |
|
| |
[Inserts one <Halfbakery Anno Place Marker>] |
|
| |
And, while I'm here how come the <Pedant Alert> tag
still does not work? |
|
| |
I was sure I said something here yesterday. Did it get
deleted, or did my computer fail to send it properly?
Anyway, it's probably irrelevant with the further discussion
that's happened in the meantime, most likely answering my
questions without even knowing I had them… |
|
| |
I didn't delete anything. |
|
| |
I can't remember exactly what I said, but: |
|
| |
The first paragraph was about not being able to tell whether this
idea was about a) a new threaded way of displaying annotations or
b) a tool to keep track of which annotations you wanted to respond
to while you kept reading, but expecting to find it useful either
way. |
|
| |
The second paragraph was in reply to the numbering suggestion,
about how the site seems to have a global annotation ID number
system in some way already (as shown by the anchors on the links
to ideas), though not an exposed or very useful-to-end-users way. I
suggested that this could be made use of in a couple of ways, but it
still wouldn't be as good a system as just manually numbering each
annotation. |
|
| |
What an annotator writes usually indicates where that string of the conversation is coming from unless it's way out of left field and needs explanation anyway. |
|
| |
All I would want is a Anno Place Marker for deleted stuff so I can guess at the deleted stuff from where the marker is. Just a [AccountHandle] would be good. It would also mark that something has been deleted. |
|
| |
//What’s an ‘ouchmouse’?// |
|
| |
I think I made this more confusing than it should be. |
|
| |
To summarize: It simply holds your place in the timeline
while you type your annotation so it's placed where you
started to write rather than what position is available by
the time you've finished writing. |
|
| |
So if the timeline is 1, 2, 3, 4, and you start typing after
4, your post will be placed in position 5 when you're
finished rather than the bottom of the queue. This way if
you're typing a five thousand word screed you won't have
multiple two or three word posts at positions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
and 10. You're position is held at 5 if you were the 5th
person to click on the response button. |
|
| |
The response button might pop up a number if somebody
hit it before you but that's probably not necessary. |
|
| |
OK, over complicated it again. Ignore that last line. |
|
| |
Some forums give a warning if someone posts in-between you hitting reply and hitting send, but honestly, if your reply has taken that long to write it's not much effort to just reload the page to see if the narrative still makes sense. |
|
| |
I completely agree about the marker for deleted posts, even a simple indication of (deleted annotation) would help in parsing the comments on older ideas. |
|
| |
// All I would want is a Anno Place Marker for deleted stuff so I can
guess at the deleted stuff from where the marker is. Just a
[AccountHandle] would be good. It would also mark that something has
been deleted. // |
|
| |
Yeah, that would be nice, especially on the really old ideas. It's
confusing to see somebody reply by name to somebody else whose name
I didn't already see. I imagine that data is no longer in the database,
though, at least because the site's database size was once a concern (!),
so it wouldn't be implementable for the ideas that would benefit the
most from it. |
|
| |
// To summarize: It simply holds your place in the timeline while you
type your annotation so it's placed where you started to write rather
than what position is available by the time you've finished writing. |
|
| |
So if the timeline is 1, 2, 3, 4, and you start typing after 4, your post
will be placed in position 5 when you're finished rather than the bottom
of the queue. This way if you're typing a five thousand word screed you
won't have multiple two or three word posts at positions 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
and 10. You're position is held at 5 if you were the 5th person to click
on the response button. // |
|
| |
I didn't get that at all! I think you can easily do this yourself, though.
Just post a "[placeholder - editing]" anno as soon as you want to reply to
something, and then immediately click [edit] and type your reply. Then,
if somebody else says something, it will come after your placeholder. |
|
| |
Simpler still, post three dots, the same as that symbol for
typing. |
|
| |
People already know what that means eh? |
|
| |
Think I'll start doing that. |
|
| |
Yeah, that's better. I've gone and bunned it. |
|
| |