From ???@??? Tue Sep 19 11:58:21 2000
To: email@example.com, matthew Haughey
<firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
From: Matt Hamer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: On Comments
As I thought about how to add comments to the framework, I had these thoughts:
Aren't comments simply posts with a different parent (a post's parent is a blog and a comment's parent is a post)?
Can't comments have a Subject and URL associated with them? Shouldn't we be able to syndicate them exactly like posts, or along with posts?
Isn't generating a comments page for a post (or posts) exactly like generating the blog page (with additional tags to refer back to the original post, etc)?
So, why not treat comments exactly like posts in the framework? Of course, we could use a completely different database, but I think the XML syntax remains the same.
Publishing comments is no different than publishing a composite blog (with posts from a bunch of different blogs).
From ???@??? Tue Sep 19 13:44:45 2000
Received: from Lilfalloon [188.8.131.52] by imail.innerhost.com
(SMTPD32-5.05) id A56A7E7022E; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 13:42:02 -0400
From: "Meg Hourihan" <email@example.com>
To: "Matt Hamer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: RE: On Comments
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:48:20 -0700
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
> Publishing comments is no different than publishing a composite
> blog (with
> posts from a bunch of different blogs).
You know, I've had the same thoughts all along, and I agree with you
completely. From a framework perspective especially, I see no reason to
treat comments differently from posts. Perhaps there's something I'm
overlooking, but I can't think of what it is.