[ZDP] Re: [Zope] object modification date - how ?

Christopher Petrilli petrilli@amber.org
Mon, 15 Mar 1999 18:39:22 -0500

On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 06:26:55PM -0500, Pavlos Christoforou wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Mar 1999, Christopher Petrilli wrote:
> > 
> > a FAQ item which contains the following information:
> > 
> > 	* Multiple-choice keywords [1]
> > 	* Difficulty level
> > 	* Question
> > 	* Answer
> > 	* Comments (contributors)
> We do need however to have a way of relating one or more answers to a
> given question and visa-versa as well as providing contributor sections
> for each question, answer and comment. 

Have I got an idea for you! ;-)

For just $19.95, you can have...

Imagine, if you will, a "peer-review" system... 

Rather than a one-to-one relationship for questions and answers, you
have a question Folderoid object which contains answer Documents.  What,
you say is the point of this? Well, I'm glad you asked!

After just buying a book on Amazon, I was struck with the idea that one
of the problems I have with many FAQs is that the "quality" is so
variable in many cases, unless someone dedicates a huge amount of time
to reviewing everything, keeping it up-to-date, etc...  Instead, you let
people contribute answers, and let OTHER people review them :-) 

Here's how it works... someone creates a new Question in some area of
FAQ, it has the following characteristics:

	* Question itself (hoozah! Imagine!)
	* Topical keywords
	* Difficulty level
	* Author information

Then, it is "answered":

	* Answer itself
	* Additional keywords
	* Difficulty level
	* Author information
	* Review rating (0-10 based on 'helped,' 'didn't help,' 'flat
	  out wrong'.

So each Question is printed,followed by it's "answers" (yes there might
be multiple approaches, etc), and then people can "review" these answers
providing some value in how substantive and useful they were for that
particular person.  Then as they are reviewed, the more favorable ones
float to the top :-)

Dynamicism strikes fear into the hearts of everyone :-)

Yes I know this is complex, but I'm not saying we NEED this to be
useful, I think it's just a good way to do things and a directional

| Christopher Petrilli                      ``Television is bubble-gum for
| petrilli@amber.org                          the mind.''-Frank Lloyd Wright