On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jayvdb@gmail.com wrote:
If it is good software, the projects will *ask* for it to be deployed, like they did with LiquidThreads, and users will want to use it on their user talk even if the wider community isnt ready to migrate.
This is the key point.
Those of us who presently use talk pages to get the work done. What is going to make us *love* Flow, for all its imperfections, and demand to have it for ourselves? What's Flow's killer feature for us?
(I asked this before.)
When I sat in on a talk about Flow at Wikimania a year or so ago, the two that made me sit bolt upright as things we can't easily do with wikitext:
* potential to work with Notifications ("tell me when anyone replies to this discussion") without needing individual pings or relying on spotting one talkpage edit in a busy watchlist - especially since on some pages a comment may come two years later.
* inter-wiki or intra-wiki integration of multiple-venue discussions rather than several parallel pages and potentially parallel discussions (not a very frequent issue, but a messy one when needed; Pine notes this below)
The more nebulous one that has great promise is using Flow for workflows/processes (which falls out naturally from the integration of discussions) - this is what Erik describes below as tags, though I think that terminology is new to me.