On 02/04/2015 08:59 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) wrote:
2) queryable, perhaps from an API or some other method, such that we could
potentially build an extension which could aggregate comments by user or
associated page (similar to Reddit, where you can see a user's comments
from their user page).

Aggregating comments by user in the API is relevant to our interests, I think. To the extent that is not currently possible (there appear to be some limitations in our API support, e.g. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88753 ), we are interested in fixing it at some point.

It is already possible to see Flow contributions as part of the Contributions page (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mattflaschen_%28WMF%29).

It is already possible to get all comments for a page from the API (in fact, this is the default with view-topiclist. (Topics are paged for performance reasons, so for long boards, you may have to iterate).

In the future, we'd also like to be able to assign
high level 'topics' to wiki pages and be able to query for discussion
threads related to these topics. Our wikis are backed by Semantic
MediaWiki, so we were thinking of using semantic properties to help with
the querying aspect if we built our own commenting system, but we're also
investigating Flow to see how well it could meet these needs.

As Nick said, we have discussed this for our longer-term roadmap. Our implementation would probably not use SMW. Whether Flow will support SMW is also an open issue (we have at least one other interested wiki that uses SMW).

I'm not sure that the header area of the Flow board is useful to us in the
pursuit of our first use case, unfortunately. It sounds like that could be
good if we were building a new wiki in which every single page was a Flow
board, and the header area was the actual article itself. That would
simulate a comment area beneath a wiki page. Unfortunately, we already have
an existing wiki with content.

In our long-term roadmap, we have discussed integrating the Flow comments into the main article.

I don't recommend the header approach you mentioned either. Among other problems, tools that support pages (e.g. VisualEditor) will not be able to work with it properly. (Even when we support VE for editing headers, it will not be the same form of it as used for editing pages).

Matt Flaschen

_______________________________________________
MediaWiki-l mailing list
To unsubscribe, go to:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

Reply via email to