Re: Implementations (former: User stories for Social API)

On 02/14/2015 10:11 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
> 
>> On 13 Feb 2015, at 18:59, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 02/11/2015 05:01 PM, Evan Prodromou wrote:
>>> On 2015-02-11 04:56 AM, henry.story@bblfish.net wrote:
>>>> I don't think that it is appropriate that the User Stories page
>>>> contain an implementation section.
>>> You're right, it's not.
>>>
>>> Elf Pavlik, I moved your groupings and implementations sections to
>>> sub-pages.
>> I needed to add back to *please* list a warning that changing stories
>> names will break links from groupings!
>> * do not rename stories! it will break links pointing to them from
>> groupings.
>>
>>>
>>> The stories are supposed to be flat and simple.
>>
>> I don't understand why do you encourage adding comments and discussions
>> under stories, but at the same time you don't accept adding a *single
>> line* which includes links back to relevant Gropings/Tags, mostly just
>> made out of a single word or even an acronym.
> 
> Btw, grouping stories under headers does not change the links to the
> stories. It seems that some of the groupings we had at the beginning of
> the week made it easier to read the stories, than just a flat listing
> as there is now.
With headers we need to force a tree structure and decide in which
'drawer' put the story in. With linked groupings we can enjoy
flexibility of a graph structure where each story can appear in any
number of groupings.

We just need to live with limitations imposed on us by the use of
MediaWiki, at least until someone steps up and makes available setup
with better support for embedding / transclusion ...