http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=588756


in reply to Re: Revitalize the Code Catacombs using DocLists!
in thread Revitalize the Code Catacombs using DocLists!

So long as authors can put their own nodes into an appropriate list, then this might work.

I'm not a big fan of things that require a privileged group. I prefer things that allow the rabble to clean things up and police each other.

But if the privileged group is only needed when a new grouping needs to be created, then this is probably as good as anything we could do without a ton more effort.

Do doclists allow one item to appear in multiple lists? That'd be a good feature. But whatever mechanism allows authors to place their items should prevent them from putting it into too many lists.

- tye        

  • Comment on Re^2: Revitalize the Code Catacombs using DocLists! (fit)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Revitalize the Code Catacombs using DocLists! (fit)
by jdporter (Paladin) on Dec 09, 2006 at 04:09 UTC
    Do doclists allow one item to appear in multiple lists?

    Yes; the parent refers to its children; the children do not refer to the parent.

    So long as authors can put their own nodes into an appropriate list, then this might work.

    One of the cool things about this proposal is that it doesn't demand any changes to the structure of the nodes being categorized. sourcecode nodes currently have a codecategory field which users are requested to fill in when posting. This could be used by the "curators" in selecting a category in which to file the new node.

    We're building the house of the future together.
[reply]

      "used by the curators in selecting" means nothing gets sorted unless a curator does it. Yuck! The normal flow should be people posting and selecting the list(s) to post to with curator intervention only required when an author gets the choice "wrong" (and clearly wrong, unless the curator gets the author's buy-in on the move).

      - tye        

[reply]
        ...nothing gets sorted unless a curator does it.

        But that's the current situation with Tutorials. Doesn't seem to be a problem there.

        The problem with the traditional "type in a category" is that posters can enter new/nonexistent categories, which means either creating a new category for every user who doesn't know how to spell, or dropping their post in an "unfiled" category anyway. Of course, it would be possible to give the poster a pick list of existing categories... but I think this could get unwieldy when the categorization structure is arbitrarily hierarchical.

        I also think the concern (if there is one) about overloading the curator group is misplaced. The volume of new postings in Code Catacombs is quite low — only about a dozen over the past two months.

        (and clearly wrong, unless the curator gets the author's buy-in on the move)

        I certainly agree with this, as a matter of principle. However, I'd offer Tutorials as a counterexample: the Pedagogues have (as far as I know) had free rein to reorganize categories and move tutorials as they see fit. And as far as I know, no tutorial poster has complained...

        We're building the house of the future together.
[reply]

In Section Inner Scriptorium