rosefox: Green books on library shelves. (Default)
[personal profile] rosefox

Title:
Crosspost to TinyLetter

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
Add TinyLetter to the available crosspost options.

Description:
TinyLetter creates newsletters that are basically blog entries, but in addition to being posted on the TinyLetter site, they're emailed to subscribers. TL users get a few basic MailChimp tools like tracking opens and clicks.

Enabling crossposting from DW to TL would be a relatively easy way for DW users to permit non-DW users to sign up for emailed updates of DW posts. It would also give DW users access to those MailChimp tools, which can be handy.

The TinyLetter web interface is quite straightforward: you get a subject line and a message body, and that's it. The message body permits formatting. TL also accepts posts via email. This would probably be the simplest way to crosspost from DW to TL: send the DW post as a formatted email to the user's unique TL post-by-email address. Here's what the TL FAQ says about that:

"To publish through your private address, create a message in your own email client to send to the address. Format and design it however you like, and be sure to include a subject line. When you're ready, just hit send. We'll create a new draft in your account and send a confirmation email as soon as it's done. After the draft is created you'll be able to log in to TinyLetter to review and send your message. Or, you can reply to the confirmation email we send once the email is beamed in. To send the message directly from your email client, simply reply to the confirmation message, keeping the subject line and address field intact, and we'll send out that newsletter to your list of subscribers."

So the user would need to confirm via email, but it's still faster and easier than copying and pasting a post from DW to TL.

If there's a TL API, there's no mention of it on their website, but one might exist.

Possible advanced feature: only crossposting posts that have the "tinyletter" tag.

Poll #16806 Crosspost to TinyLetter
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 30


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
10 (33.3%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
1 (3.3%)

(I have no opinion)
19 (63.3%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

erinptah: (Default)
[personal profile] erinptah

Title:
Enable Diigo to crosspost to Dreamwidth

Area:
external sites, crossposting

Summary:
I can set my Diigo account to automatically crosspost recent bookmarks to other sites, including LJ and Wordpress. Dreamwidth should get in touch with Diigo about enabling the same to DW, and should set whatever permissions are necessary for it to do so.

Description:
The summary is it, really. The only alternative for Diigo users is to manually crosspost our bookmarks on a regular basis, which is a headache for so many reasons.

Diigo's existing crossposting utility works on LJ, so it should be just as safe and workable for DW.

The main stumbling block is whether Diigo is wiling to implement the necessary changes on their end. And it seems likely that if they were contacted by administrators saying "we're willing to make it possible on our end," they would be amenable to going for it.

Poll #13641 Enable Diigo to crosspost to Dreamwidth
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 36


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
7 (19.4%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
29 (80.6%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

algeh: (Default)
[personal profile] algeh

Title:
On the system default footer for crossposts, make the word OpenID a link to information about OpenID

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
According to http://www.dreamwidth.org/manage/settings/?cat=othersites the current default footer for crossposted entries is
<span style="font-size: smaller;">This entry was originally posted at <a href = "%%url%%">%%url%%</a>. Please comment there using OpenID.</span>".

I suggest changing it to
<span style="font-size: smaller;">This entry was originally posted at <a href = "%%url%%">%%url%%</a>. Please comment there using <a href="http://www.dreamwidth.org/openid/">OpenID</a>.</span>

Description:
I believe that many people, particularly users of LiveJournal who don't try to use their LJ as their main cross-site "internet identity", may not understand that the phrase "Please comment there using OpenID" at the end of a crossposted DW post using the default footer means they are likely to be able to comment on that post at Dreamwidth without creating a DW account by using their LiveJournal account via OpenID. They may not have any idea what OpenID is or that they already have one (or several) OpenID identities that they can use with minimal hassle. I base this assumption on the fact that I've had reasonably clueful LJ friends post anonymously to my DW posts and "sign" them in the body or subject line with their LJ identity rather than post them using OpenID (based on the type of comments, this is not a situation where it's likely someone is impersonating someone else).

Turning the word OpenID in the footer into a link to http://www.dreamwidth.org/openid/ would give readers a way to find out more about what OpenID is (and a place to log in using it) without cluttering up the footer with additional explanatory text. I am making the assumption that the amount of detail to include in the system default footer has been previously considered and that it's been decided not to include a lengthier explanation of OpenID in the text of the footer itself (I can see arguments both for and against this).

Note: I have no idea what the system default footer crosspost text actually is right now. I've changed mine around several times and am assuming the text at the bottom of http://www.dreamwidth.org/manage/settings/?cat=othersites is accurate. If it's not, I have an additional suggestion of updating that page to accurately reflect whatever the system default footer currently is, ideally by pulling the correct string automatically if this is not currently done.

Poll #12914 On the system default footer for crossposts, make the word OpenID a link to information about OpenID
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 55


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
41 (74.5%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
14 (25.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

timmc: (Default)
[personal profile] timmc

Title:
"Display crosspost link" should be retroactive

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
When "Display Crosspost Link" in Account Settings > Other Sites is checked or unchecked, it should retroactively affect all of a user's existing Dreamwidth entries.

Description:
Motivation: I only recently discovered that this option existed, and was enabled on my account. I disabled it because my DW journal is a public identity and it crossposts to a non-public LJ identity. I'd really rather not have that link show up on old entries, but I don't know how to remove it!

Expected behavior was that changing the setting would change the old entries.

Note: Editing an old DW post does not seem to change the link's existence.

Poll #12913 "Display crosspost link" should be retroactive
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 50


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
7 (14.0%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
15 (30.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
5 (10.0%)

(I have no opinion)
19 (38.0%)

(Other: please comment)
4 (8.0%)

holyschist: Image of a medieval crocodile from Herodotus, eating a person, with the caption "om nom nom" (Default)
[personal profile] holyschist

Title:
Crossposting while logged out

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
Create a setting so that if a particular journal is set to crosspost by default, posting while logged out or logged in as another account will still cause the journal to crosspost.

Description:
Currently, when posting while logged out or while logged in to a different account, journals set to crosspost to another service will not crosspost automatically. If the user then wants to crosspost, they have to log out, log into the other account, and manually edit the post to crosspost. This reduces the utility of the post-while-logged-out option, since the user has to log out and back in in order to crosspost.

For example:

1. birdaccount is set to automatically crosspost to an LJ mirror

2. user is logged into dogaccount, but posts to birdaccount using the "switch accounts" feature on the update page

3. birdaccount does not automatically crosspost

4. user has to log out of dogaccount and then into birdaccount to manually edit the post to crosspost to LJ, defeating the point of posting while logged out

I would love it if automatic crossposting settings for an account were respected no matter how the post to the account is made, so that

1. birdaccount is set to automatically crosspost to an LJ mirror

2. user is logged into dogaccount, or not logged in at all, but posts to birdaccount

3. birdaccount automatically crossposts to the LJ mirror

This would make it far easier to switch between DW journals while maintaining mirrors to other sites, without having to set up two browsers or constantly log in and out.

Poll #12624 Crossposting while logged out
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 44


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
25 (56.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
4 (9.1%)

(I have no opinion)
15 (34.1%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

azurelunatic: A glittery black pin badge with a blue holographic star in the middle. (Default)
[personal profile] azurelunatic

Title:
Integrate better with LiveJournal's "spoiler" tag

Area:
entries, comments, importing, crossposting

Summary:
LiveJournal has implemented a <lj-spoiler> tag, which should be accounted for when importing and crossposting.

Description:
There's been past discussion (most recently http://dw-suggestions.dreamwidth.org/1303478.html ) about how to best make a spoiler/trigger/not-expanded-by-default tag work for entries and comments on Dreamwidth. LiveJournal has since implemented a method to do just this, and it would be wise to remain compatible with it.

When importing, entries with <lj-spoiler> tags should retain the type of concealment it is, the custom warning text if any, and the text within.

When importing, comments with <lj-spoiler> tags should not lose any data.

When Dreamwidth implements its own version, things tagged with <lj-spoiler> should be backwards compatible - if already posted, they should be treated accordingly.

New crossposted entries containing the <lj-spoiler> tag should be passed on to LiveJournal without mangling the tag; when our version happens, it should convert to LiveJournal syntax when crossposting to LiveJournal, just as usernames are.

New entries containing the <lj-spoiler> tag should be displayed sensibly on Dreamwidth, either consistent with a regular <cut> tag (if that's quick and easy to set up before implementing it properly) or properly.

Whatever method we use should remain accessible. If implemented with scripts for inline expansion, non-script viewing should retain any custom warning text and the fact that this was concealed, and give sufficient time and space for people to decide to stop reading (this should accommodate very fast readers who skim and can absorb the gist of whole sentences/paragraphs in seconds before their executive function has caught up, as well as screen reader users who may need time to tell their screen reader to stop reading). It should also not suck for mobile device/small screen users.

One possible method would be to automatically add "spoiler space" as was done manually on email lists of old: for example, typing <mask text="OMG!">WTF!!</mask> (or however it's decided to do locally) might result in:

*** MASKED CONTENT: OMG! ***

*
*
*
*
*

WTF!!

*
*
*
*
*

*** END MASK ***

Poll #9954 Integrate better with LiveJournal's "spoiler" tag
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 73


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
52 (71.2%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
4 (5.5%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
16 (21.9%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (1.4%)

stillnathan: (Default)
[personal profile] stillnathan

Title:
Moving entire posts from one journal to another or a community

Area:
posting

Summary:
It would be really useful to be able to make a post, have comments on it, and finish it, especially for rpging, and then be able to move that entire post, with comments, over to a different comm. That would allow for pre-writing of events and scheduled things, and make for some really neat actions!

Description:
This idea would work well to enable people to pre-write things in their journal. Say a person wants to present a new effect, or a style, or a html code, or even just a paper with proper formats. They could do it in their own journal, set it up, make sure it works, and then enable this effect, and be able to just move the post over with a drop down 'post to' box.

This would be especially helpful for roleplayers, who often write stuff out ahead of time, trying to mesh schedules for large posts, or to allow for people in different time zones to complete something, then post it so it appears suddenly. With the ability to do this entire, a lot of that would become easier. In addition, those who accidentally post in the wrong community, and even have conversation back and forth before it is realized would be able to move the post, with those comments, to the correct comm.

Poll #9852 Moving entire posts from one journal to another or a community
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 54


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
8 (14.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
4 (7.4%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
16 (29.6%)

(I have no opinion)
25 (46.3%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (1.9%)

darkmagess: (Default)
[personal profile] darkmagess

Title:
Twitter notifications of new posts

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
Allow me to link to my Twitter account and post the subject line and link when I post.

Description:
The one thing I really miss from LJ is Twitter posting. I don't think comments should be crosspostable or anything from a journal that you don't own. But when posting a new item to your journal (or maybe to a public community?) I would really like the option to send a Twitter notice. I have lots of friends who used to read journals and have stopped, but they will follow a link from Twitter and read if it's right in their face.

I'd post the subject line and a condensed link only.

Poll #9488 Twitter notifications of new posts
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 56


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
17 (30.4%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
6 (10.7%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
9 (16.1%)

(I have no opinion)
24 (42.9%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

transcendancing: Darren Hayes quote "Life is for leading, for not people pleasing" (Default)
[personal profile] transcendancing

Title:
Crossposting to Dreamdwidth from Posterous

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
I have what I call my 'grown up' blog over at Posterous (www.posterous.com) and maintain my beloved personal blog here on DW. Posterous auto crosspost to LJ and I desperately want an auto crosspost feature to DW.

Description:
Posterous (www.posterous.com) is a kind of tumbleblog and they have in place mechanisms to do auto-crossposting to other services. They don't yet do this to Dreamwidth and I've suggested it to them on multiple occasions, and I wonder if Dreamwidth approaching them whether it might actually happen. At present it seems to suffer from being at the bottom of the list of their priorities, and I respect that but it's increasingly difficult to make the best use of my blogging and time having to manually do the post/cross posting thing.

I am hoping that because DW is based on the LJ sourcecode that the work needed to have a DW auto cross post would be less work than they perhaps think it will be. I'm not a coder and I can't speak to that, sorry.

Having this ability will improve shareability between platforms, for those of us who do have multiple blog spaces it cuts down the time needed to manually post/link to/update all the spaces.

The drawback is that I'm asking DW about it and it relates to a push from another service to DW which possibly makes it not possible from this end. It may be that I need to push at Posterous and provide them with more context and detail as to how to go about implementing this.

This is a potential alternative actually, could you provide me with some support to liaise with Posterous so that I can make a better case to them about having the auto-crosspost feature if it's not within your purview or capability to directly engage with Posterous about this?

Hoping that I've provided a useful amount of detail for you and that it's a suggestion that is useful in some way.

Many sincere thanks for how approachable and involved you and the entire volunteer team of DW coders are with regard to improvements on the service and engaging with all the things big and little that matter to DW users.

Poll #8833 Crossposting to Dreamdwidth from Posterous
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 48


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
9 (18.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
39 (81.2%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

syderia: lotus Syderia (Default)
[personal profile] syderia

Title:
Changing icons keywords when crossposting

Area:
icons

Summary:
This suggestion would enable DW users who cross-post to other sites to say that while the icon they picked on DW answers to the keyword "hello", the cross-poster should use the icon answering to "goodbye" on the other site.

Description:
If I've chosen to cross-post to other sites, I would get new fields to go with my icons, one per site (I think), on which I could optionally chose to type keywords corresponding to my icons on each of the other sites.

I'm thinking of this for the people who don't have the same number of icons on every site. Currently, either the keywords match, then I have the right icon, but if they don't, the post appears with my default icon on other sites.

People could either leave the fields empty, retaining the current behavior, or write down correspondences between keywords. Should a keyword not exist anymore on the site, the cross-poster would either fail the cross-post, or reverting to the default icon (preferred behavior I suppose, but I don't know if it's possible) and signal the error to the user.

This could be a paid feature.

Poll #8669 Changing icons keywords when crossposting
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 54


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
12 (22.2%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (3.7%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
10 (18.5%)

(I have no opinion)
30 (55.6%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

yvi: Kaylee half-smiling, looking very pretty (Default)
[personal profile] yvi

Title:
Disable old crossposter links

Area:
Crossposting / Styles

Summary:
Have a way of disabling crossposting links on old entries

Description:
Currently, we can choose whether to display links to entries that are crossposted to another site. However, these links seem to stay behind even when the crossposting account settings are deleted here: http://www.dreamwidth.org/manage/settings/?cat=othersites . Disabling the crosspost link option only means the links won't get added to new entries and has no effect on old entries. There seems to be no way to get rid of the old links, something that some users may wish to do (disentangling two accounts for privacy reasons, for example).

I propose there to be an option to disable displaying them. Maybe a question when deleting a crossposting account setting from the linked page or when you disable it for new entries you get the option to also remove them from old entries.

Poll #7750 Disable old crossposter links
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 57


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
36 (63.2%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (3.5%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
1 (1.8%)

(I have no opinion)
16 (28.1%)

(Other: please comment)
2 (3.5%)

mellowtigger: (Default)
[personal profile] mellowtigger

Title:
crosspost to Google+

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
When I post on Dreamwidth, I want a blurb added to my feed in Google+.

Description:
When I post on Dreamwidth, I want a blurb added to my feed in Google+. Not the whole post, just a few things (similar to how Livejournal crossposts to Facegook):
1) Google+ title= "Dreamwidth: (post title)"
2) Google+ image= (post icon, if any)
3) Google+ text= (first 30 words from the post) and (link to Dreamwidth post)

Poll #7726 crosspost to Google+
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 65


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
20 (30.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
7 (10.8%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
12 (18.5%)

(I have no opinion)
24 (36.9%)

(Other: please comment)
2 (3.1%)

eosrose: (Default)
[personal profile] eosrose

Title:
Option to split entries that are too long for crossposting into multiple entries

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
DW is absolutely awesome for allowing entries to run significantly longer than LJ, but this causes problems when you want to crosspost an entry (especially when it's an entry that you'll need to update regularly, like a recs list or an index of some kind) because crossposting won't work. So I propose that a tag be created to mark where an entry should be split into mulitple posts when crossposting to sites that don't allow so many characters in a single entry.

Description:
The Problem: We cannot crosspost entries to sites with a smaller character limit per entry than DW.

Proposed Solution: Provide the option to split an entry into multiple posts on the site being crossposted to.

Caveats:
- We can't just split up a post after a certain number of characters unless we want to run into issues where we cut off right in the middle of words, etc. So we would have to create some sort of cut-tag to be manually inserted where the user wants a new entry to start.
- A suffix of some kind would have to be added to the end of the subject to indicate that the entry is, for instance, Part 1/3.
- The separate entries should automatically link to one another.

Implementation: I have a feeling that this might be pretty complicated to implement, possibly even eat up resources(?). I would advise making it a paid feature. (I would totally purchase a paid account to have this option.)

Poll #6968 Option to split entries that are too long for crossposting into multiple entries
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 56


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
18 (32.1%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
7 (12.5%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
6 (10.7%)

(I have no opinion)
20 (35.7%)

(Other: please comment)
5 (8.9%)

branchandroot: oak against sky (Default)
[personal profile] branchandroot

Title:
Enable crossposter to output like the rss feed, if desired

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
Enable an option to crosspost truncated entries, according to the syndication level the user has set.

Description:
The crossposter crossposts the full content of any entry, and normally this is just what one wants. But I know there are times I've wished I could set it to crosspost only part of the entry, with a link back to my DW entry--to crosspost a lure, as it were, rather than a full mirror. The RSS feed already does this, as default behavior, and has a few more options besides, depending on how much info one wants to broadcast. So I suggest giving the crossposter the option to post at those same levels (full, cut, summary, and title [http://www.dreamwidth.org/support/faqbrowse?faqid=119]), taking its cue from the synlevel that's set.

This would require something new in the crossposter settings, but that interface is still quite simple until you get to the "what does my footer look like" section, so as long as this comes at the top it doesn't seem like it would be option-overload. I envision something like "Crosspost using Syndication Level [checkbox]"; it would be especially useful to make the words "Syndication Level" a link to the Privacy area of settings, possibly adding an anchor to the Syndication Level line for this purpose. Because the default syndication level is to truncate to the cut tag, the default setting for this option should be unchecked.

Ideally, using the synlevel setting will make this easier to implement, both because no new setting option will have to be created and because the syndication level setting is one that at least some of the userbase is already familiar with. It already has its own control in the GUI settings area and won't require messing around with the admin console. This seems like a reasonable way to add flexibility without adding complication.

Poll #6687 Enable crossposter to output like the rss feed, if desired
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 46


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
21 (45.7%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
9 (19.6%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
3 (6.5%)

(I have no opinion)
13 (28.3%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

azurelunatic: A glittery black pin badge with a blue holographic star in the middle. (Default)
[personal profile] azurelunatic

Title:
Separate crosspost footer for when comments are disabled on Dreamwidth.

Area:
crossposting, entries

Summary:
Add a separate crosspost footer for when comments on Dreamwidth are disabled.

Description:
Sometimes you just want to turn off all comments, no matter where you're posting.

Currently, when comments are disabled on Dreamwidth, the "comments disabled locally" footer is used. This footer is also used when comments are disabled on the crossposted-elsewhere entry but turned on at the Dreamwidth entry. This increases the chances that people will have put text explicitly inviting people to go over to Dreamwidth to comment.

If comments on Dreamwidth are disabled, it makes no sense to invite a person viewing your entry on a remote site to come to Dreamwidth and leave a comment.

It is one more setting to potentially confuse people, but the alternative involves confusing and annoying a more broad range of people on other sites with every cross-posted entry that invites people to comment but it turns out not to be possible.


[feature already exists; poll closed.]
Poll #6509 Separate crosspost footer for when comments are disabled on Dreamwidth.
This poll is closed.
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 51


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
31 (60.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
1 (2.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
1 (2.0%)

(I have no opinion)
16 (31.4%)

(Other: please comment)
2 (3.9%)

siderea: (Default)
[personal profile] siderea

Title:
DW/LJ filter sync on Grant Access for Crosspost Users

Area:
Granting, crossposting

Summary:
If one has cross-posting set up, the page http://www.dreamwidth.org/manage/circle/add?user=GRANTEE&action=access should default to proposing the same group memberships as friends filter memberships on the cross-posting site.

Description:
The Problem:

For folks who make heavy use of access filters, cross-posting between LJ and DW doesn't work out so great, which is actually discouraging transitioning to DW.

Right now, if you have cross-posting set up between LJ and DW, the only way to keep your filters in sync is to do so manually. In addition to being a really irritating hassle, this has proven to be highly error prone.

I have now lost count of the times that I have clicked through someone else's DW xpost link over on LJ in a locked post only to discover that I didn't have access on DW because the author had had their filter lists on DW get out of sync with LJ: I was on the filter to see the post on LJ, but not on DW. This includes cases where the author had turned off commenting on the LJ post to drive commenting to DW.

In all the cases where I have delicately pointed out, "Hey, I can see this on LJ, not DW; are you sure I'm supposed to see it at all?" the response was, "Oops! Crap! You're supposed to be on that filter!"

This is actually frustrating migrations to DW -- if when given the choice to comment on DW or LJ, and only LJ consistently works, one's friends will strongly prefer commenting on LJ, and effectively resist using DW.

A Solution:

This would actually be a pretty easy problem to somewhat ameliorate, if not entirely solve, for the common case of someone trying to keep a DW journal and an LJ journal in sync.

Here on DW, the interface for granting read access to another user is http://www.dreamwidth.org/manage/circle/add?user=USERNAME&action=access. This page not only allows one to grant read access, but shows the user a list of their subscription filters for optional assignment. By default they're all unchecked.

Instead, if (and only if) someone (USER@DW) has crossposting set up (to USER@LJ), and in the sole circumstance they were granting access (on tick of the "grant" box) the page could use their stored tokens (or prompt for them) to log in to LJ to see if (1) the USER@LJ is friends with an account of the same username as GRANTEE@DW, i.e. GRANTEE@LJ, and if so, (2) get the memberships of GRANTEE@LJ in USER@LJ's filters, and wherever those LJ filter names correspond to USER@DW's filter names, default those checkboxes to checked.

Put another way, if you have crossposting set up, when you go to grant access to someone, if your crosspost account is friends with someone of the same name over on LJ, DW will propose (not require, just default) to add them to any same-named filters here on DW.

Additionally: if one visits that page to //modify// filters (the target user is already granted access) it would be nice if the page listed in text one's LJ filters that user is a member of, ideally in a column next to the tickyboxes for fast visual comparison.

Additionally: if (again the original case of on granting) they are members of any filters over on LJ that don't have corresponding filters on DW, the interface should simply state them in text, along side the list of tickyboxes, i.e. "On LJ, you have a friend named 'Fred', and he's a member of the following filters."

Optional variations: Add a boolean field, "Sync filters", on a crosspost record, where if it's ticked, that crosspost relationship will try to do the above, and if not, not.

Some Assumptions:

That the case of granting access to someone who has the same username on both LJ and DW, and whom one has already "friended" over on LJ, is incredibly, incredibly common. Thus anything which assists filter management in this case is actually addressing a large chunk of the problem, even if it doesn't work in other cases (see next), so long as it's not detrimental in any of them.

That the case of granting access to someone who is a "friend" on LJ, but who has chosen a different username here on DW is not all that uncommon, but dwarfed by the prevalence of the previous case, therefore it would still be helpful enough to trouble to do this. (Heck, someone could go all out and provide a field on the page in question, "This DW user is the same as this LJ user: [field]" and allow the grantor to specify, for purposes of populating those filter tickyboxes, which user the grantee should be considered the same as, making this solution extend to this case, too.)

That the case of true name-space collisions (one is friends with fred@LJ on LJ and grants to fred@DW on DW, and these are two completely different people) is both so rare and so notable, that the user can be trusted to notice that's what's going on, and untick tickyboxes as necessary.

That for people migrating between LJ and DW, the majority of filter-assignment happens when they grant to an LJ friend who has created a DW account. While people may be creating new filters on either platform and going through and adding to them at any time, that is more rare than assignment on granting. Thus helping keep filters in sync just on initial granting addresses a large chunk of the problem. While it might be nice if we could also support //ongoing// synchronization of filters, that's a much harder problem, and we can solve 75% of the problem without going to all that work.

Implementation Details:

If LJ doesn't have an API for getting at that info, I suggest scraping http://www.livejournal.com/friends/add.bml?user=USERNAME for the filter list and membership.

As I've described the feature (interface responsive to changes in field values such as the "grant access" tickybox, maybe a field for corresponding username, prompting for LJ login tokens), either AJAX is required or the functionality of the page would have to be broken across several pages.

Over the Top Elaboration Discouraged:

If we really wanted to go all out with xpost filter sync, we could have a whole interface here on DW for manually assigning correspondences between one's DW filters and one's LJ filters, as part of one's xpost settings; e.g. "my 'fam' filter on LJ == my 'family' filter on DW". That seems to me like doing 900% of the work for 10% of the benefit, so unless the previous more modest suggestion were to be implemented and prove wildly loved and important, I'd skip it.

It would be kinda neat to have a "xpost filter audit" page that one could go, that would basically diff one's filter lists, and report any of one's grantees whose filter assignments differ between DW and LJ, so one can do something about it manually if one feels like. But at this juncture that would be feature creep.

Poll #5573 DW/LJ filter sync on Grant Access for Crosspost Users
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 44


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
10 (22.7%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (4.5%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
14 (31.8%)

(I have no opinion)
18 (40.9%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

popelaksmi: (Default)
[personal profile] popelaksmi

Title:
Crossposting a place-holder or link only

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
Ability to crosspost either a placeholder or link only, instead of the whole body of a journal entry.

Description:
It would be nice to have the capabilty/ option of crossposting a placeholder or link only instead of the whole body of a journal entry for those of us who would like to post more content on DW and as little as possible on the other site (like LJ) yet let friends reading those other journals know when a new post has been made.

Poll #5107 Crossposting a place-holder or link only
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 52


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
35 (67.3%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
8 (15.4%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
1 (1.9%)

(I have no opinion)
6 (11.5%)

(Other: please comment)
2 (3.8%)

azurelunatic: A glittery black pin badge with a blue holographic star in the middle. (Default)
[personal profile] azurelunatic

Title:
Lockable crosspost link

Area:
entries, security, crossposting

Summary:
Allow display of crosspost links to public, access list, custom security group, or only you.

Description:
This suggestion is inspired by a spinoff comment in another suggestion: http://dw-suggestions.dreamwidth.org/404239.html?thread=2453007#cmt2453007

Sometimes you're crossposting, and it would be very convenient for you to have the crosspost link on all your entries, but for varied reasons you might not want to display that crosspost link to your readership or the general public:

Your readership might not appreciate it (particularly if they've washed their hands of a place that you still crosspost to)
The link might not be something you want to publicize
Trying to concentrate comments on the DW version
Different names on other sites
The crosspost is locked and not everybody who can see the local version can see the remote version
You want to see at a glance whether you've crossposted or not, but don't need to display it to your readers
The crosspost link is convenient if you need to go edit the remote post, but you don't need to display it to your readers

Problems with the concept include that every time there's a page element that displays to some readers but not others, there's a chance that someone will refer to it in comments, not realizing that others can't see it. Also, I believe security-checking stuff can be database-expensive. Because of this, public/private/off might be the best option.

Poll #4881 Lockable crosspost link
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 53


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
15 (28.3%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (3.8%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
5 (9.4%)

(I have no opinion)
31 (58.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

pseudomonas: (Default)
[personal profile] pseudomonas

Title:
By default, comments be enabled on only one crossposted site

Area:
crossposting

Summary:
When a new crossposting site is added, the default assumption should be that either comments are to be allowed there (and disabled on DW and other crosspost sites) or allowed on DW and disabled there.

This requires the functionality not currently present of posting with comments disabled on DW and enabled on a remote site.

Description:
Having parallel discussion threads on different sites

a) is often unconducive to productive discussion, as half the commenters will not be talking to the other half.

b) makes people who want to read all comments keep track of twice as many entries.

c) leads to people missing many comments, often with the journal owner being unaware that they are doing so.

I am *not* proposing that it should be made *impossible* to allow comments on more than one site, simply that the *default* assumption should be that users keep their comments all in one place, and offered a choice of which site hosts comments.

Poll #3685 By default, comments be enabled on only one crossposted site
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 38


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
2 (5.3%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
3 (7.9%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
29 (76.3%)

(I have no opinion)
3 (7.9%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (2.6%)

rosefox: Green books on library shelves. (Default)
[personal profile] rosefox

Title:
Add customizable text footer to crossposted entries

Area:
Crossposting

Summary:
I would like to see a footer in the text of my crossposted DW entries that (as much as possible) matches the footer on my LJ entries.

Description:
I would like each of my DW entries to have a footer in the entry text that says:

"This entry has been crossposted. Read it on [link]LiveJournal[/link]."

Ideally it should be as customizable as the footer that appears on the crossposted entries elsewhere (allowing the user to change what it says as well as the text style), and have the option for multiple links if the entry is crossposted to multiple sites. Having it appear in the text of the entry is important; showing the current link setup requires style modification (at least for those of us who use custom S2 styles) while having it in the text means it will show for everyone in every style.

To make it clearer, if you look at

http://rosefox.dreamwidth.org/1598852.html?format=light

the crosspost link is very obvious. But if you go to:

http://rosefox.dreamwidth.org/1598852.html

you can't see any info on the crossposts because it's a style object rather than part of the post text.

Poll #3462 Add footer to crossposted entries
Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 34


This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
9 (26.5%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
4 (11.8%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
9 (26.5%)

(I have no opinion)
12 (35.3%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Profile

Dreamwidth Suggestions

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
23456 7 8
9 101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom