IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New I *told* you I didn't think before typing, didn't I?
But to answer your question, if "Category" means the same thing as "forum" does now, then yes, any articles under ... wait ... new thought coming in ...

Does an "article" really need to be a different kind of thing? Or rather, what kind of thing does it need to be? Is it simply the root post of a thread, with the special behavior that it disappears within x days if there are no comments? Or is it a sort of ad-hoc category in its own right, with the first comment being "level 1" within that category? (I'm not talking implementation, but conceptually.)

I'm still thinking through this as I type, but I'll throw my current thinking out in case it triggers any flashes of inspiration.

Let's say you have categories. Within each category, you can have articles and "unassociated" threads. Internally you maintain an "Open Topic article" for each category, which the "unassociated" threads actually descend from. The display can be admin- or user-selected to be one of three styles, depending on forum type and traffic:
  1. Only articles on the front page. "Open Topic" is listed as the last article on the page. All articles show an "Unread Posts" count. (Non-logged-in users would just see "Posts".) Open Topic shows "X Unread Posts in Y threads". To create a new open thread you have to click into the Open Topic article first. Articles (except for Open Topic) drop off the front page after x days.
  2. After "Articles" on the front page are the unread second level threads under the Open Topic article, each appearing as a top-level article. All topics and Open Topic threads show "Unread Posts". (Or "Posts" when not logged in.) There is a "New Topic" button at the top of the page that adds an "Open Topic" thread. Articles drop off the front page after x days.
  3. Similar to option 2, but show all unread threads expanded.
I would expect a default view of type 1, so new users would see recent articles. Occasional users might choose option 2 so they can always see what's recent. Daily users would like option 3, which is essentially what we have now.

I would think under options 1 & 2 if you are viewing an article "Mark All" should work at the article level, which means all threads under the Open Topic would roll up under a single date. Under option 3, or when viewing the front page under options 1 & 2, "Mark All" would work for all articles in a category. Basically "Mark All" applies to whatever level you're looking at. This might mean setting dates for every top-level article in a category, or having a separate date field at the category level, depending on performance / optimization issues.
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New The trick is size and performance...
Settle down, ladies.

I'm using 250K users and 1K posts/day as my benchmark. Size calculations follow from there.

Most of this is stuff I'm already thinking of doing, at any rate. I'm trying to lead discussion here along without saying too closely what I'm thinking of in order not to prejuidice the discussion.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Expand Edited by admin June 12, 2006, 05:02:29 PM EDT
New You mis-spelled "laddies"
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New ICLRPD (new thread)
Created as new thread #258657 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=258657|ICLRPD]
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
     This is a bit more involved than I thought. - (admin) - (35)
         Perhaps turn the problem around... - (ChrisR) - (23)
             Re: Perhaps turn the problem around... - (admin) - (22)
                 Just thinking of the way I'd use it.... - (ChrisR) - (21)
                     Seconded - (drewk) - (20)
                         OK, I'll buy that, but... - (admin) - (19)
                             Just hypothetically, right? ;-) - (drewk) - (16)
                                 Of course not. - (admin) - (15)
                                     I would mark Articles and Threads separately. - (Another Scott) - (10)
                                         I see your point about linking discussion to articles ala /. - (drewk) - (5)
                                             Why not both? - (admin) - (4)
                                                 What exactly happens each week? - (drewk) - (3)
                                                     Re: What exactly happens each week? - (admin) - (2)
                                                         Guess I was being pessimistic - (drewk) - (1)
                                                             Tuple space depends on holes. - (admin)
                                         On making things general: - (admin) - (3)
                                             I hope I haven't seen the GUI already. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                 My God, it's full of... - (admin) - (1)
                                                     :-> -NT - (Another Scott)
                                     I *told* you I didn't think before typing, didn't I? - (drewk) - (3)
                                         The trick is size and performance... - (admin) - (2)
                                             You mis-spelled "laddies" -NT - (drewk)
                                             ICLRPD (new thread) - (ben_tilly)
                             Thoughts about articles... - (static) - (1)
                                 That's how I've been thinking about them. - (admin)
         Save database space and do it client-side - (pwhysall) - (3)
             I could be wrong... - (ChrisR) - (2)
                 Re: I could be wrong... - (admin)
                 You could use lots of them - (pwhysall)
         hmm, a non programmers answer - (boxley) - (2)
             And if there are 250K users...? -NT - (admin) - (1)
                 bigassed hashed key :-) -NT - (boxley)
         Try a variation of the Usenet approach? - (Another Scott) - (1)
             That was my idea as well - (tuberculosis)
         Alternatively... - (pwhysall) - (1)
             Size. - (admin)

There will be no disappointment.
61 ms