Use twitter for discussion threads on posts #171

Closed
michael opened this Issue Jul 7, 2012 · 11 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@michael
Member

michael commented Jul 7, 2012

We could use twitter to attach discussion threads to any Prose documents. Might be easy to implement. Same approach as on the developmentseed blog, except we'd show the actual tweet not just the user.

@samanpwbb @gundersen what do you think?

@ghost ghost assigned michael Jul 7, 2012

@gundersen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gundersen

gundersen Jul 9, 2012

@michael you thinking more for people using Prose for their blog tat would want to see the tweets?

@michael you thinking more for people using Prose for their blog tat would want to see the tweets?

@michael

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@michael

michael Jul 9, 2012

Member

@gundersen Nah, that's left over to the website developer. I'm actually referring to the post creation process, such making comments/suggestions on an unpublished article. But now that I think about it, tweets may not be the way to go here. They're too explicit or official for this usecase. I've looked into the GitHub API since they feature comments as well, but they stick on commits, and I'd rather have them just attached to a particular file.

Doesn't have high priority though. It was just a thought to improve the collaborative writing / review process.

Member

michael commented Jul 9, 2012

@gundersen Nah, that's left over to the website developer. I'm actually referring to the post creation process, such making comments/suggestions on an unpublished article. But now that I think about it, tweets may not be the way to go here. They're too explicit or official for this usecase. I've looked into the GitHub API since they feature comments as well, but they stick on commits, and I'd rather have them just attached to a particular file.

Doesn't have high priority though. It was just a thought to improve the collaborative writing / review process.

@samanpwbb

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samanpwbb

samanpwbb Jul 9, 2012

Member

I think we should place collaborative / community editing in general outside the scope of the Prose backend.

Member

samanpwbb commented Jul 9, 2012

I think we should place collaborative / community editing in general outside the scope of the Prose backend.

@gundersen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gundersen

gundersen Jul 9, 2012

@michael ah, ok. Yeah, I know internally we would never tweet about drafts we are working on - we would use a ticket in Github for this.

@michael ah, ok. Yeah, I know internally we would never tweet about drafts we are working on - we would use a ticket in Github for this.

@michael

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@michael

michael Jul 9, 2012

Member

@samanpwbb Mhh not sure. Actually I consider this as one of the main-use cases, since that's what we do. Someone writes up a blogpost and other give comments and alter the text until it gets published. It would be very convenient to have this discussion available right within Prose, instead of using an external discussion thread.

@gundersen yeah, that's what I mean.. it could be even easier. :)

Member

michael commented Jul 9, 2012

@samanpwbb Mhh not sure. Actually I consider this as one of the main-use cases, since that's what we do. Someone writes up a blogpost and other give comments and alter the text until it gets published. It would be very convenient to have this discussion available right within Prose, instead of using an external discussion thread.

@gundersen yeah, that's what I mean.. it could be even easier. :)

@gundersen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gundersen

gundersen Jul 9, 2012

@michael cool, I am not seeing a workflow issue with using tickets to talk about the status of a page or a blog post, since we use tickets to talk about everything. It would be more complicated to have to have a separate ticketing system just for publishing. A lot of ideas just start as tickets, not as posts, so I don't see how this would work since the thread would be on a ticket to begin with and we are using github a lot to refer to other tickets like #ticketnumber when talking about a post etc.

@michael cool, I am not seeing a workflow issue with using tickets to talk about the status of a page or a blog post, since we use tickets to talk about everything. It would be more complicated to have to have a separate ticketing system just for publishing. A lot of ideas just start as tickets, not as posts, so I don't see how this would work since the thread would be on a ticket to begin with and we are using github a lot to refer to other tickets like #ticketnumber when talking about a post etc.

@samanpwbb

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@samanpwbb

samanpwbb Jul 9, 2012

Member

@michael Hm, I get what you're saying, definitely. Right now using the GitHub issue tracker to discuss posts makes a lot of sense for our internal use case. So the question is, 'how do we abstract this same discussion away from GitHub for people that want to use Prose, but don't want to deal directly with GitHub?". That's a big question, but if we do go about tackling it, I think it should be based on GitHub if possible, not through some other system.

Member

samanpwbb commented Jul 9, 2012

@michael Hm, I get what you're saying, definitely. Right now using the GitHub issue tracker to discuss posts makes a lot of sense for our internal use case. So the question is, 'how do we abstract this same discussion away from GitHub for people that want to use Prose, but don't want to deal directly with GitHub?". That's a big question, but if we do go about tackling it, I think it should be based on GitHub if possible, not through some other system.

@michael

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@michael

michael Jul 9, 2012

Member

Yeah totally. GitHub it is. I'll need to investigate the API more. Maybe we can even use the Github Issues API for that. There just needs to be a way to connect the issue with the concerned post / file, and a way to query it.

·····························································
http://substance.io · http://quasipartikel.at
·····························································

On Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Saman Bemel-Benrud wrote:

@michael Hm, I get what you're saying, definitely. Right now using the GitHub issue tracker to discuss posts makes a lot of sense for our internal use case. So the question is, 'how do we abstract this same discussion away from GitHub for people that want to use Prose, but don't want to deal directly with GitHub?". That's a big question, but if we do go about tackling it, I think it should be based on GitHub if possible, not through some other system.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#171 (comment)

Member

michael commented Jul 9, 2012

Yeah totally. GitHub it is. I'll need to investigate the API more. Maybe we can even use the Github Issues API for that. There just needs to be a way to connect the issue with the concerned post / file, and a way to query it.

·····························································
http://substance.io · http://quasipartikel.at
·····························································

On Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Saman Bemel-Benrud wrote:

@michael Hm, I get what you're saying, definitely. Right now using the GitHub issue tracker to discuss posts makes a lot of sense for our internal use case. So the question is, 'how do we abstract this same discussion away from GitHub for people that want to use Prose, but don't want to deal directly with GitHub?". That's a big question, but if we do go about tackling it, I think it should be based on GitHub if possible, not through some other system.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#171 (comment)

@gundersen

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gundersen

gundersen Jul 9, 2012

y, agree. would love to see tickets show up that are referencing the post.

On Jul 8, 2012, at 11:25 PM, Michael Aufreiter wrote:

Yeah totally. GitHub it is. I'll need to investigate the API more. Maybe we can even use the Github Issues API for that. There just needs to be a way to connect the issue with the concerned post / file, and a way to query it.

·····························································
http://substance.io · http://quasipartikel.at
·····························································

On Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Saman Bemel-Benrud wrote:

@michael Hm, I get what you're saying, definitely. Right now using the GitHub issue tracker to discuss posts makes a lot of sense for our internal use case. So the question is, 'how do we abstract this same discussion away from GitHub for people that want to use Prose, but don't want to deal directly with GitHub?". That's a big question, but if we do go about tackling it, I think it should be based on GitHub if possible, not through some other system.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#171 (comment)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#171 (comment)

y, agree. would love to see tickets show up that are referencing the post.

On Jul 8, 2012, at 11:25 PM, Michael Aufreiter wrote:

Yeah totally. GitHub it is. I'll need to investigate the API more. Maybe we can even use the Github Issues API for that. There just needs to be a way to connect the issue with the concerned post / file, and a way to query it.

·····························································
http://substance.io · http://quasipartikel.at
·····························································

On Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Saman Bemel-Benrud wrote:

@michael Hm, I get what you're saying, definitely. Right now using the GitHub issue tracker to discuss posts makes a lot of sense for our internal use case. So the question is, 'how do we abstract this same discussion away from GitHub for people that want to use Prose, but don't want to deal directly with GitHub?". That's a big question, but if we do go about tackling it, I think it should be based on GitHub if possible, not through some other system.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#171 (comment)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#171 (comment)

@patcon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@patcon

patcon Sep 6, 2012

Member

What about using HTML comments that wouldn't show up in preview?

## Comments/Collrboration

Maybe we could use HTML comments?

<!-- A comment that would be rendered differently in prose's preview mode.
The publish button could purge comments like this as part of the commit? -->
Member

patcon commented Sep 6, 2012

What about using HTML comments that wouldn't show up in preview?

## Comments/Collrboration

Maybe we could use HTML comments?

<!-- A comment that would be rendered differently in prose's preview mode.
The publish button could purge comments like this as part of the commit? -->
@dhcole

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dhcole

dhcole Mar 25, 2013

Member

Out of scope for the next version. Pls see #295

Member

dhcole commented Mar 25, 2013

Out of scope for the next version. Pls see #295

@dhcole dhcole closed this Mar 25, 2013

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment