Wikiversity:Threaded discussions with NavFrames with subst/20070522105803

CQ's Comment here: Is this a precurser to liquidThreads ( trying to graft by cut-and-paste; comment duplicated, but link is kept)

20070521211912

• Comment: Is this a precurser to liquidThreads ??? -- CQ 21:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

--CQ 21:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[1]

Re: Is this a precurser to liquid threads? No.

20070521213744

• Comment: I don't know what "liquid" means. This is a simple (see the text at /preload) and flexible model of threaded discussion. It is flexible because it is basically a set of pages, indexed by REVISIONTIMESTAMP, transcluded in a tree-like manner. The techniques used here are:

1. transclusion/substitution meta:substitution#optional substitution
2. preload
3. NavFrame
4. The m:magic word REVISIONTIMESTAMP

--Hillgentleman|Talk 21:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[2]

What links here

What links here

Grafting /20070519101448

20070522161211

• Comment: Grafting a thread by JWSchmidt

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[3]

Testing the "external link"

"Argument:I'm guessing that my comment goes here." , 17:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

A one liner may go here.

NavHead

This revision=20070519172843

• Argument: Here we can elaborate....

--Hillgentleman|Talk 17:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[4]

Here is the point: the REVISIONTIMESTAMP is precisely for that purpose.

NavHead

This revision=20070519173345

• Argument: BASEPAGENAME/1/1/1/1/1... can only produce a linear structure.

Originally I tried REVISIONID, which didn't work: if we substitute a revisionid, we get blank. --Hillgentleman|Talk 17:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[5]

And try not to create your own section.

NavHead

This revision=20070519173646

• Argument: Use the "reply link" to create a new section, or else you would create a dead end.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 17:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[6]

I mean,

NavHead

This revision=20070519174254

• Argument:

My "A one-liner may go here" is a reply to ":I'm guessing that my comment goes here." and "Here is the point: the REVISIONTIMESTAMP is precisely for that purpose." replies "Can there be sections within treads". But that latter section was created articficailly (without pressing the "reply button") and so it hijacked the reply link to the previous comment. Or we can say, two different comments (and two different replies) were merged. That makes the questions and answers crossed. So it is a little confusing.

In short, Don't create your own section. Use the "reply" link. Once you have created a section, you are free to edit your previous comments, correct mistakes, etc.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 17:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[7]

IF you find this text too small

NavHead

This revision=20070519174550

• Argument:

go to a subthread by pressing the edit button.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 17:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[8]

Problem fixed by reintroducing a thread

NavHead

This revision=20070519183132

• Comment: See above.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 18:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[9]

Complicated

20070521195901

• Comment:So far, this is too complicated for me to understand. I'm adding this comment as an experiment. -- CQ 19:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

--CQ 19:59, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[10]

What links here

Testing the easier preload

20070522163726

• Comment:{{{1}}}

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[11]

What links here

Testing preloadeasy, take 2

20070522164129

• Comment:variable fixed, and the reply link fixed. Any problems?

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[12]

What links here

testing preload easy, take 3

20070522164421

• Comment: problems?

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[13]

so far so good...

20070522164455

• Comment: so far so good

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[14]

Can we include a line break in the "Comment=" ?

20070522165111

• Comment: Line break:->

<-line break

skip a line --Hillgentleman|Talk 16:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[15]

What about pretext tag?

20070522165230

• Comment:

This above all, to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[16]

What links here

What links here

What links here

What links here

We may also use subsection headers to clarify the threadings

20070522165516

• Comment:

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[17]

such as this

20070522165546

• Comment:

--Hillgentleman|Talk 16:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[18]

What links here

All threads are created equal

20070522194432

• Comment: This suggestion is not advisable. All threads are created equal

--Hillgentleman|Talk 19:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

• reply[19]

What links here

the test

20120528223359

• Comments: Simple test --Be nt all (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

--Be nt all (talk) 22:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

• reply[20]

What links here

What links here

We can track new threads with category! This is a thread on 20070604.

20070604062650

• Comment: This is a thread on 20070604.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 06:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• reply[21]

What links here

We really can track new threads with category!

20070604063208

• Comment: Fforgot in the previous comment: didn't add the category in /preloadeasy. One should use /preload.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 06:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• reply[22]

perhaps not too effectively, when a node has many subnodes... See category:threads 20070604

20070604063503

• Comment: See category:threads 20070604. This may be an idiosyncracy of this model...

--Hillgentleman|Talk 06:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• reply[23]

What links here

But it is still okay; just check the time stamp on each reply...

20070604063925

• Comment: For example, from category:threads 20070604 -->Wikiversity:Threaded_discussions_with_NavFrames_with_subst/20070522105803 --> look through the time stamps --> find the thread "We really can track new threads with category! " with time stamp 20070604063208.

Suggestions for improvements, folks? --Hillgentleman|Talk 06:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• reply[24]

What links here

And, of course, if the flow is sufficiently big, we may even use categorytree.

20070604064957

• Comment: To use the mw:extension:CategoryTree, we need to have the category created in the first place.

--Hillgentleman|Talk 06:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• reply[25]

Not quite; Categorytree doesn't take a dynamical variable ...

20070604065253

• Comment: (

--Hillgentleman|Talk 06:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• reply[26]

Now it does: CategoryTree can now be used as a parser function and can take arguments.

20071204114910

• Comment: See: mw:Extension:CategoryTree

--Hillgentleman|Talk 11:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• reply[27]

What links here

What links here

What links here

What links here

This is a response test

20081009014851

• Comments: Testing a response

--66.183.189.23 01:48, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• reply[28]

Wikiversity:Threaded discussions with NavFrames with subst/20081009014851What links here

20090201151141

• Comments:

Hello. I am just testing what all of this is about, and what we are actually doing. I'll just check. --The Winster ^talk 15:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• reply[29]

Again, Just Testing what the headline can do....

20090201151334

• Comments:

Hello. testing what the headlines can do. --The Winster ^talk 15:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

• reply[30]

Exactly. If you have a short comment, just put it on the headline.

20090205061138

• Comments: --Hillgentleman | //\\ |Talk 06:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

• reply[31]

What links here

What links here

What links here

CHECKING preload easy

20090624123430

• Comment: Just checking what preloadeasy does

--Dharav ^talk 12:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

• reply[32]

20090909041046

• Comment: good idea

--210.75.252.157 04:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

• reply[33]

What links here

What links here