 September 24, 2007 - 6:52am | Just some lil icon for the command icon set that means "Start a forum topic in this currently-viewed project and automatically insert a link to the url I'm currently viewing in the body of the new topic" ? 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
 September 24, 2007 - 7:37am | Correct....and maybe put in the Project Name and Document Title in the new forum topic Title field. possible?  -w00t Giving CleanCutRouge a WHAT FOR |
September 24, 2007 - 7:48am | Of course it's possible. I think it only really makes sense in Documents... because everything else you can have a threaded discussion right under it. So no need to have such a button on project support issues or other content types. Yeah - I think I can work out setting the title appropriately too. 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
September 24, 2007 - 12:16pm | hehe... I just realized you want to click on a "buttom" - not sure why but that sounds dirty. Okay, I've added a small icon to the design document pages. Looks like this:  Hovering over it will say "Discuss this document in this project's forums" or something to that effect. Clicking it will open a /node/add/forum form and pre-populate it with something like: Subject: [Equipment Repository] Document discussion Body: Refer to: Equipment Repository. Then of course you can add/edit as desired. 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
September 24, 2007 - 12:36pm | It occurred to me that there could end up being sixteen topics started from the same document. Is there any way that each time afterward that it gets clicked, that the button instead posts a reply to the original? Or do you think there would be enough variances in subject to warrant new threads each time? Or maybe, when a thread is created on the subject, it then generates a new button saying to discuss the thread, while still having the original button to start a new thread. But then, that might end up producing a bunch of buttons for each topic. Maybe it generates a dropdown list of threads created for it? |
September 24, 2007 - 12:42pm | Better yet, I know I suggested removing the threads from the individual documents to begin with, but here is an idea I suggested for blogs on Gleemax. If you made the thread accessible from both the forum and the document, it would retain the ease of finding in the forum (the reason I suggested taken it out of the documents in the first place), while still being directly connected for easy access in the document. Just like the what's new and guestbook tags making those things accessable on other pages, except here we wouldn't need the tags, just the double access aspect (from forum and from document). |
September 24, 2007 - 12:47pm | The button could still produce the thread that wouldn't otherwise exist unless the button is pushed. |
September 24, 2007 - 12:57pm | Can this button be changed so that if it's clicked to add a forum topic the new button becomes an image that represents that a topic already exist? (so there isn't duplicate topics. |
September 24, 2007 - 1:19pm | All valid points. This is getting overly complex though. The simplest solution would be to just have threaded discussions under each document page, but we previously thought that was a bad idea because of the fluid nature of the design documents. Yes, it would be neat if I had a combobox or something located under any given document page showing a list of topics already in progress about this page, but that's unfortunately not possible. Forums aren't programically tied to anything other than their container (project name) - meaning there is no way through code to know that someone is talking about this page or that page on any given forum thread. Even the forum topics generated by this new icon in the command bar of the document doesn't really tie the forum topic programically to the document... especially since people could easily edit the subject line or body. So I don't think it's possible to have that. I think the way it is now is sufficient to promote discussion in the forums regarding ongoing documents. Yes, it's possible that a document will get deleted - making the link to that page invalid. But that would be true with any link anyone makes anywhere on the site, whether it points to this site or another. It's also possible that a page might get moved or edited - but at least in that case the link will still work because the node number will be the same. I don't want to have the button add to a single long topic relating to that document - that will make a forum conversation that doesn't read properly. Having multiple discussions on the same topic happens all the time on various sites. Do we really need to do anything more than this icon/button? 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
September 24, 2007 - 1:21pm | Can this button be changed so that if it's clicked to add a forum topic the new button becomes an image that represents that a topic already exist? (so there isn't duplicate topics. What if I wanted to open a philosophical discussion about the color choice of a font on that document, and you wanted to discuss the statistical advantage of a piece of equipment on that document, and Jace wanted to discuss the technical believability about a vehicle listed in that document? All valid, and each deserving its own topic of conversation. Having one single forum topic about a page is the same as having comments for the page... isn't it? 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
September 24, 2007 - 1:29pm | How about at the bottom of the document it lists links to the threads existing from that document, similar to the subordinate documents list. |
September 24, 2007 - 2:09pm | Because like I said - there is nothing that ties a thread to that document. Even if you click this new "discuss" button, the newly generated forum thread isn't associated with that document except through the content of the discussion within that thread, do you know what I mean? How would I know which topics have to do with the currently-viewed document in order to list them? I don't want to do a search... that would bring up all sorts of stuff unrelated. I could bring up all topics that have the subject "[documentname] Document discussion" but document names are editable - as are forum topic titles. Maybe I could keep track of any topics created by pressing that button... then display them inline under the document as just a series of links, but that wouldn't catch all discussions, only those initiated by pressing that "discuss" icon. Would that be enough? 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
September 24, 2007 - 3:10pm | Because like I said - there is nothing that ties a thread to that document. Even if you click this new "discuss" button, the newly generated forum thread isn't associated with that document except through the content of the discussion within that thread, do you know what I mean? How would I know which topics have to do with the currently-viewed document in order to list them? I don't want to do a search... that would bring up all sorts of stuff unrelated. I could bring up all topics that have the subject "[documentname] Document discussion" but document names are editable - as are forum topic titles. That's pretty much what I'm suggesting and is all that is needed. And I hope by "I" you mean you would program it to track those things.Maybe I could keep track of any topics created by pressing that button... then display them inline under the document as just a series of links, but that wouldn't catch all discussions, only those initiated by pressing that "discuss" icon. Would that be enough? |
September 25, 2007 - 3:44am | Alright - try that.... 3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
September 25, 2007 - 9:53am | Yes, that's perfect. |
September 25, 2007 - 10:07am | why doesnt the title auto-populate? |
September 25, 2007 - 2:19pm | why doesnt the title auto-populate? Because that would be silly... Fifteen titles all identical with completely different conversations under them? How would people know which one to go to?3. We wear sungoggles during the day. Not because the sun affects our
vision, but when you're cool like us the sun shines all the time. |
