[pmwiki-users] RFC: Ratings Redux

Ben Wilson dausha at gmail.com
Wed Sep 27 12:00:20 CDT 2006

On 9/27/06, Patrick R. Michaud <pmichaud at pobox.com> wrote:
> I don't think we need a "rating" for this -- a simple [[!Unsupported]]
> category tag will do.  If someone asks a question and gets no answer
> or a slow one, then just add the [[!Unsupported]] tag to the page
> (ideally right next to the question that is needing an answer :-).
> Then we can easily identify which recipes are "unsupported".

Perhaps we should consider an included flag instead of just a category
tag? I regret to use the example of Wikipedia.[1] However, that page
provides a fine example for reference. Let's use "unsupported" as an
example. If a recipe is unsupported, then we could put the following
markup at the top of the page:

(:include Site.PageFlags#unsupported#unsupportedend:)

This markup would provide a colorful banner informing the reader of
the unsupported nature of the recipe (perhaps even encouraging the
reader become a foster parent of the page?). In that banner would also
be the [[!PageFlaggedUnsupported]] category, which should help  list
which pages need assistance.

In the alternative, perhaps (:flag unsupported:) would magically
accomplish the same task via pre-(:include:) markup replacement? This
would reduce typos in the longer (:include:) markup.

Just my 0.015 Euros.

Ben Wilson
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PeerCast

More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list