[uf-new] Comments proposals - threaded comments

[David Janes]

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Sarven Capadisli <csarven at gmail.com> wrote:

> Although it works well for chronological comments, doesn't work too
> well for threaded comments.
>
> On a similar note, doing "hentry comment" together [6] works fine for
> chronological comments but not threaded. It was this case that led me
> into investigating Atom's in-reply-to. But now I understand and agree
> that it reflects a minor representation of comments out there as far
> as having an anchor with rel="in-reply-to".

I certainly don't think "hentry comment" is a great idea, though I've
seen this in the wild (Niall Kennedy's blog).

> Clearly, our main problem is threaded comments. We are on the same
> page here right?

Well, I'm not sure. Is it in scope or not? I've certainly taken flak
today for saying we have to take into account multiple comments -
because that's how they occur in the wild - saying we have talk about
"a comment".

In either case, I'm still quite comfortable that the "Schema #2"
proposal -- baring of course _lots more investigation_ - covers it,
for the real-world examples shown.

Regards, etc...

-- 
David Janes
Mercenary Programmer
http://code.davidjanes.com