Annotations – please try it out!

The annotations work I’ve been talking about over the last few days is now live on the test server. Please have a play and let me know what you think. Is it too limited? Does the page layout need tweaking? Maybe the way the moderations work isn’t quite right? All feedback gratefully received.


One of the things which probably does need changing is this: currently you can enter a “no change” mod (i.e. edit the annotation, hit “Save” without making any changes). Hey presto, chalk up one more automod for you. That’s probably not a good thing.

Also the arguments could do with stronger validation, to prevent annotations being attached to disallowed artists / albums.

8 thoughts on “Annotations – please try it out!

  1. zeroGravitas

    I’ve had a quick fiddle and it looks good to me.

    One question though – aren’t we leaving ourselves wide open to annotation spamming?

  2. dupuy

    The test server seems to be down at the moment, perhaps related to the search.musicbrainz.org stuff that Robert set up?

  3. dupuy

    w.r.t. annotation spamming, this is no more open than the wiki (since the history of annotations is recorded), and since you need a MB moderation account, it’s unlikely to be robo-spammed.

    the one catch is that to ensure that manual spam is quickly deleted, you need to have an easy way to see what was recently added. since the annotation adds are automoderated, they won’t show up in the common moderation searches, so we probably want to have a new one on the site menu. also, having some easy way to see a simple diff of the changes made for a particular annotation is very helpful for this (and in general).

    another random thought; it would be nice if the FreeDB import automatically created an annotation based on the FreeDB NOTES info.

  4. azertus

    I noticed: no “enters” possible, no length limit or at least a very large limit (maybe this is a good thing) and there’s no option for completely removing an annotation (or maybe empty annotations are deleted hourly by the modbot?)

  5. bawjaws

    Do you want feedback here? Or sf.net or mailing list?

    Initial feedback:
    ————-

    * the annotation itself is more important than who wrote it, perhaps that info could be smaller and placed at the bottom right?

    * a simple formatting system to add structure would be nice, though they can be processor intensive if you don’t cache the output. Markdown (written in Perl) in XHTML safe-mode would get the nod from me: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/

    * Is there an easy way to link to other artists/albums/songs that won’t get broken on renames/edits/merges?

    * Annotation full-text search with Lucene ? Yes, please. (off-topic: why does Google site search not work with the actual content of MB)

    * long entries should probably get a “read more…” link after a set number of words.

    * other off-topic remark: the image link at the top of the comment page is bust.

    * back on topic: this is a very nice addition, thanks.

  6. Dave Evans

    OK, I’ve started a thread on mb-users to discuss this: it’s called “Annotations: feedback invited!”. I think it’s best in future to keep this sort of thing on the list, not the blog – it makes it easier to discuss.

  7. mo

    I to have played around with it, may I just say NOW

    Thank you thank you thank you!

    its an excellent feature.

    I agree that some mark-up should be allowed, just simple lineshift and maybe even bold italics underline, but really all I would ask for is the paragraph, it would be nice to include this in notes to.

    ~mo

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s