This discussion space is for comments on the document "doc-collab.html".

Interestingly, I had no way of knowing this URL until I uploaded, which meant I had to re-upload the document after I learned the URL and added it. In short, the good news is that until comments have been added, you can upload new versions of your document. After comments have been added, you'd have to delete the document and start again.

Hmm, I guess QuickTopic doesn't treat <BR> broken lines as paragraphs, which is "correct" though I could see some people being confused by it.

<BR> tags aren't block-level elements in HTML, so (although they force a line break) QuickTopic reasonably isn't treating them as a separate "commentable" entity, anymore than it would treat text in <STRONG> or <EM> tags as a separately commentable entity.

"Separately commentable" - is that even valid grammar? :-)

gd

Although please note Adam's TBTXT search link won't actually work until early Tuesday morning, Pacific Standard Time, after the Great Task of Synchonizing Databases is Automatically Performed by My 68K-based Minions.

Who says old Macs are useless? :-)

gd

Thanks to the tidbits team for setting this up a working example. Great stuff!

  I was thinking about something like this for collaborative email, but had a hard time defining how that might be structured or done.

test

I like this - I just tried to post a comment without giving my name but you can't do that
Now as long as they are honest about who they are.......

utyfuytf

It does appear you can put any name you like however

For collaborative email, if I'm understanding what you want, a wiki would make more sense, I think.

Adam, Eudora is still a great product and I'm willing to use it in sponsored mode...I do hope that Qualcomm will offer a fully carbonized version of the application for Mac OS X.

What the heavens?

Don't worry, Eudora will be available for Mac OS X as a Carbon app.

NIce review

Edited by author 03-20-2001 01:25 PM
I noticed on the Wiki page that Adam's html uses ">" and "<" rather than & gt; and & lt;. I thought that those symbols were forbidden in html?

Mostly this comment is just testing out the system, not really of any importance.

Great article!

Great topic, my heinie! Great decade and a half of being indispensible and inspirational.

KDL

This would seem to imply that QuickTopic Document Review is one product, and QuickTopic is a different product. Gee, I'm so smart!

QTDR is a feature of QT, enploying some of the collaboration conventions honed within QT and adding some new ones appropriate to the doc-review task.

I loved the article. Sort of Alan Kay-type inspirational stuff. (Alan Kay is mentioned, I know.)

Edited by author 03-22-2001 12:03 PM
I'll certainly have to agree, Adam, that Eudora (or virtually any modern email client) offers a better text-composition environment than any vanilla webform-based text-creation environment. But, like most users of such systems, I've gotten inured to composing "offline" in NotePad (or some HTML-capable env. like EMACS/HTML mode, as I am now doing) and pasting into the webform.

On the point of "archiving everything for posterity," sure, that works well and good within your own email world, but when it comes time to share a conversation you've been having with colleagues with a newcomer, how do you bring 'em up to speed? If you've used a LISTSERV to mediate the conversation, you've got one alternative; but imho Quick Topic provides that same level of functionality with a heckuvan easier UI.

Plus, while it's true that QuickTopic itself is a lightweight Web-based single-topic discussion space, the existence of easy topic-branching and the My Topics and Shared Topics "meta-features" makes QT's environment far more flexible and useful, and imho approaches true email-style multi-threading -- with all the ease-of-use and single-topic opt-in or -out that you could want.

(Please pardon my obvious bias; I'm "way into" QT as you can see; but only because I frankly think it's "way cool.")

Another of the recent "constant polishings" is the addition of user control over what HTML markup will receive "comment dots." It's a two-stage process: First the user decides whether to award dots to all [TD]s, [H3]s, etc.; then s/he can go thru the actual doc and decide which particular instances of the selected types of of markup will actually get a dot. There's some stuff in most docs that's "cast in stone" in any case -- e.g., a Copyright notice; no need to allow comments on that...

Not to be totally anal about this <G> but these comments are imho "General" rather than about Item #1 in particular. There's a way to get 'em labeled as such... and I'll do it now...

Edited by author 03-22-2001 02:02 PM
This is a general comment on the doc as a whole. Same UI as for commenting on any particular Item #, but it (and any other General comments) get put into a different "bin" in the Comment Review... HTH :-)

---

But WAIT, don't order yet!! There's another DYNAMITE feature you get for FREE!!

• The first time anyone enters a General Comment, a cute pair of QTDR sunglasses is put next to the leftmost option on the QTDR page...

Edited by author 03-22-2001 02:10 PM
I'm one of the folks who's had the privilege of working with Steve Yost, suggesting features, UI twiddles, finding bugs and the like. I've run into this problem too, and have suggested some workarounds. At this writing, QTDR "correctly" handles <br><br> as a poor stab at a para-break. A single <br> is not comment-dotted.

Steve's well aware of this issue and is now generalizing the handling of <br>s. It's a delicate balance between KISS and allowing for flexibility for the more advanced user (or the user who mis-uses <br>s) :-) But I'm confident that the solution he comes up with will be simple yet powerful, hence elegant.

I think the trick with <br> tags is that lots of HTML generation tools overuse them in place of proper <p> tags, so supporting them in some way is important.

True. I've seen lots of strings-'o'-BRs in HTMLcode... Deprecable, regrettable, but yes, it's common usage. Especially strings-'o'-BRs separated by whitespace chars...

Actually this one's not a tricky balance of simplicity, etc. I just need to modify the parser to ignore all-whitespace-between-brs, and I haven't gotten to it yet :-)

Brain-dead link.

Akin a wiki. A wiki akin? What is a wiki a kin to? A wok, perhaps?

Hey! I reversed that, but it isn't a palindrome! I want my money back! :-)

Cool feature

test

Edited by author 12-02-2002 11:20 AM
BATMAN... I say, did you say BATMAN?!

cool !

Testing