Hi,
I really liked the way the comments are implemented on this website https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/5e7ed624986d
Basically the comments are associated to each paragraph, and a little number appears next to it. When clicking it, it displays the comments. I can imagine that it would also make sense on wikipedia, where most comments are related to specific points in the text.
The article itself is also worth a read ;-)
Cheers, Micru
David Cuenca, 20/06/2014 11:18:
Basically the comments are associated to each paragraph, and a little number appears next to it. When clicking it, it displays the comments. I can imagine that it would also make sense on wikipedia, where most comments are related to specific points in the text.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Feature_map#1._Ratings_and_Reviews https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46440
Nemo
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Feature_map#1._Ratings_and_Reviews https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46440
The difference with the OKFN annotation tool is the way of presenting the
number of comments. On the annotator they are shown directly as highlighted text, here there is a number per paragraph, which perhaps makes the layout less bloated.
Micru
Hi Micru,
Basically the comments are associated to each paragraph, and a little number appears next to it. When clicking it, it displays the comments.
There's already a similar implementation for MediaWiki. It's basically a modification of Extension:Comments and it allows to associate comments with sections. You can see it live at WebPlatform.org [1].
Best, Markus
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Markus Glaser markus.glaser@wikimedia.de wrote:
There's already a similar implementation for MediaWiki. It's basically a modification of Extension:Comments and it allows to associate comments with sections. You can see it live at WebPlatform.org [1].
And that is mediawiki-powered? Really cool!
Cheers, Micru
Perhaps also relevant: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/washington-post-new-york-times...
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 2:07 PM, David Cuenca dacuetu@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Markus Glaser <markus.glaser@wikimedia.de
wrote:
There's already a similar implementation for MediaWiki. It's basically a modification of Extension:Comments and it allows to associate comments with sections. You can see it live at WebPlatform.org [1].
And that is mediawiki-powered? Really cool!
Cheers, Micru
David Cuenca wrote:
Perhaps also relevant: http://wapo.st/1vXz9nb
--- Washington Post, New York Times and Mozilla team up for new Web site comment system ---
I read about this earlier this week. I thought it was a bit strange for these companies to be seemingly fixed on building their own tool. I got the impression that this foundation simply had money to burn. It also wasn't clear to me whether the project would be open source or not, though given that it includes Mozilla, I'm somewhat hopeful.
Jeff Atwood has been working on http://www.discourse.org. I haven't been following the project too closely, but it feels as though it's trying to solve at least some of the same problems.
There are also tools such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disqus, which due to privacy considerations wouldn't be good for sites such as Wikimedia wikis. But for older publishers such as the New York Times and the Washington Post, who already try to track every visitor with a dozen or more tracking pixels and cookies and whatever else, this wouldn't really be an issue and it's already a fairly popular and well-known tool.
This isn't to say that this new endeavor is focusing on an easy problem or a problem that doesn't need additional attention. Global communication is a very tough nut to crack, without a doubt. But it feels like some of these efforts aren't working with each other to achieve the same goals, and that's a bit frustrating and annoying. Putting $3.89 million into improving an existing tool (or tools) seems like a better use of money than creating yet another tool, in my opinion.
MZMcBride
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 7:19 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
This isn't to say that this new endeavor is focusing on an easy problem or a problem that doesn't need additional attention. Global communication is a very tough nut to crack, without a doubt. But it feels like some of these efforts aren't working with each other to achieve the same goals, and that's a bit frustrating and annoying. Putting $3.89 million into improving an existing tool (or tools) seems like a better use of money than creating yet another tool, in my opinion.
I agree with you, there are too many projects, considering that there is also Hypothes.is, which has been in development for 3 years now and which recently received a $750k grant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothes.is
Hopefully all of them will use the Open Annotation standard, which at least should make comments and annotations more compatible between platforms.
Ideally there should be some initiative from the Wikimedia world to figure out how our comment system would integrate into this ecosystem. It would be a good issue to put in the strategic plan (given that the unmoderated ArticleFeedbackTool failed so miserably), next to what actions to take to deal with open data.
Cheers, Micru
interesting. there might be other applications as well which could benefit from references to paragraphs. like wikidata, book creation, especially for education. educational material often needs to be for a region and does not want to have information for multiple countries in it.
rupert Am 20.06.2014 13:58 schrieb "Markus Glaser" markus.glaser@wikimedia.de:
Hi Micru,
Basically the comments are associated to each paragraph, and a little
number appears next to it. When clicking it, it displays the comments.
There's already a similar implementation for MediaWiki. It's basically a modification of Extension:Comments and it allows to associate comments with sections. You can see it live at WebPlatform.org [1].
Best, Markus
[1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/Main_Page
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org