[pmwiki-users] Rating cookbooks
john.rankin at affinity.co.nz
Sun Jan 25 18:50:06 CST 2009
On Saturday, 24 January 2009 11:28 AM, Patrick R. Michaud <pmichaud at pobox.com> wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 09:41:42AM +1300, john.rankin at affinity.co.nz 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
>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
>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
: ''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
- 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
Hope this helps
T 64 4 495 3737
F 64 4 473 7991
john.rankin at affinity.co.nz
More information about the pmwiki-users