[pmwiki-users] Another stab at ratings on PmCalendar page

[Peter Bowers]

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