Structured comments suggestions

[anonymous]

It would be funny to have something in between AddCommentMacro and PollMacro - something that allows users to add (append) to a page in a structured way. E.g. a user registration page for a project is a good example. Here one would like to know from the "commenter" the name, the e-mail, an URL, an intended usage, and so on. The macro for structured comments should enforce that all users that add to the page use a common formatting.

This is a generalization of ticket:10, where only the name or e-mail of the commenter is requested. Structured comments should go further.

[anonymous]

As starting point, it would be great, if one could provide a "template" as argument to the AddCommentMacro.

[anonymous]

One way of providing "template" for comments I implemented ​here:. Basically "template" just a wiki page with special markup. Part of it is used to render input (ie allowing more than 1 input field); part for formatting output a direction of growth. So same Comment Macro, using different templates, allows to generate comments in very different formats. Like comments on top - like in a blog, comments as ​adding a row to a table, ​summary of discussion, ​commented bookmarks.

"talk" template relies on table-of-contens macro of Twiki, which auto-generated from HTML headers. Easier to use than TracNav macro, which requires navigation page be edited manually.

for "bookmarks" template one guy even implemented mozilla toolbar which inserted bookmarks to a wiki using comment plugin. Comments text was hihglighted text from page, link text was window title. Quite cool.

Just to show you how useful could be different templates. If interested, pls email me at: peter DOT masiar AT yale DOT edu

[athomas]

This seems like a good idea, something like a generic form description macro. It would be quite a bit of work to get it done in a flexible enough manner though.

I think it's a bit outside the scope of either AddCommentMacro or PollMacro however.

[coderanger]

Removing keyword, as I see no reason for it to apply to this.