add parent link to comments in inbox

[zvi]

Title:
add parent link to comments in inbox

Area:
inbox

Summary:
The comments posted to your inbox do not have information which identifies the comment to which they are responding. It would be nice to have a parent link which would open the comment directly above them in the tree.

Description:
I would love this because I am constantly opening up the comment in another window and then opening the parent link, and this would save me an (unnecessary) step. (I call the step unnecessary both because I already saw the child comment in my inbox, and because the parent comment shows the child comment as a matter of course.)

The only problem I can foresee with this is that it might make the whole entry look cluttered? Also, it might work weirdly with the javascript.

Poll #1559 add parent link to comments in inbox

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 26

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
22 (84.6%)

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

Shouldn't be implemented.
0 (0.0%)

(I have no opinion)
3 (11.5%)

(Other: please comment)
1 (3.8%)

Comments

[ninetydegrees]

I think a link to the top comment in the thread is planned. I'd prefer this.

[zvi]

I wouldn't prefer this, although the top comment in the thread in addition wouldn't necessarily be bad.

The problem with top comment in the thread is that if the comments are long enough, the comment you just got in your inbox and its immediate parent may be collapsed. Also, even when not collapsed, finding the specific subthread in which the comment and parent reside may be difficult, the branch is wide enough, even if not deep.

[ninetydegrees]

Just to make sure: I'm not talking about the first top comment, I'm talking about the immediate top thread comment (or top subthread comment if you prefer).

[zvi]

Okay, I'm not at sure what you mean any more.

What I think you mean is, if I get comment

II A 4 iii b 5 (envisioning the thread structure as an outline)

I want a link to b and you want a link to II.

Or are you talking about something else?

[ninetydegrees]

Hmm. I'm not sure this is it. I took your example and applied it to the first comment thread of the latest news post:

I
	a
	b
	c
		i
			*
		ii
			*
			**
				#
					@
						&
				##
			***
		iii
		iiii

If my comment's & I get a link to ** because it's the top comment in my thread.
See what I mean better now?

[triadruid]

I think zvi is asking for a link to @ instead. I agree that both are useful, but @ would be more useful, more of the time.

[ninetydegrees]

Oh I get what she wants. I was trying to explain what I wanted instead and we weren't sure we understood each other. :)

[zvi]

No. I don't understand the criteria the software should use to differentiate between ** and I, ** and c, or ** and #.

[ninetydegrees]

I don't know either but it's not my place to know whether this is possible. I already don't understand how your suggestion or LJ's system is feasible.

[denise]

I think what zvi meant is that given your example, what you consider the 'top' of the comment isn't what anyone else would consider the top. Given that example, I could see arguments being made for links to both @ (immediate parent) and c (farthest root; top-level comment), but you're asking for a link to ** which is somewhere in the vague middle of the tree.

[zvi]

Yes, that's my confusion exactly. Thanks.

[zvi]

No, it's not that I think you should know how to write the regular expression. I don't know as a human being why you're calling ** the ancestor and not I, c, or #.

[ninetydegrees]

I, c, ii and ** are all ancestors. ** is just the closest in your particular fork. I'd love just a link to I (I think this is what's planned) tbh.

[msilverstar]

+1 good idea as is