Stet
From WhyNotWiki
From README:
- The system is named "stet", after the proofreader's mark meaning "let it stand as it is". Stet is a collaborative document revision system, getting its users and commenters to the point where they can say "let it stand as it is" about the whole document.
http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Comment_system
- The system is designed so that comments must be attached to pieces of text in the existing draft. This is to keep discussion focused on the work at hand, which is to get the license text right.
- Ajax-powered
- source is hard to read, seems disorganized, but ideas/functionality is impressive
Contents |
[edit] Interface for reading document
"→ loads all the comments on the whole section, to spare you from clicking on every different-colored span to load them all individually." [1]
[edit] Can visually see which parts of the document have generated the most discussion.
"Phrases that are subject to more comments are highlighted more intensely (white-yellow-red-black)."
Example: http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/gplv3-draft-2.html#
[edit] Can agree with an existing comment by clicking the "agree" button.
[edit] Interface for submitting comments
http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Comment_system
- The system is designed so that comments must be attached to pieces of text in the existing draft. This is to keep discussion focused on the work at hand, which is to get the license text right.
- If you feel like your comment does not apply to any specific existing text, then consider what would need to be added to the license text in order to address your comment. Would the license need an entirely new section? Then attach your comment to the title of the license itself. Would an existing section need a new subsection? Then you could attach your comment to the existing section title. If your comment suggests a change in the overall philosophy in the license, then perhaps text would need to be added to the preamble -- so you could attach your comment to the Preamble title.
[edit] Submitting comments via e-mail
http://gplv3.fsf.org/comments/email.html
"Email submissions will be parsed and processed automatically, and in order for your comments to be associated with the relevant portions of the text, please send your messages in the following format:"
From: [Send your message from the same account you used to register at fsf.org] Subject: [The string of contiguous draft text that you wish to comment on] [Body] [One line summarizing your comment] [at least one blank line] The body of your comment regarding text in your subject line.
[edit] Interface for reviewing/grouping comments
"As the drafting process goes on, comments are being grouped together into common issues for the drafters to evaluate."
[2] "This view is good for seeing what those issues are and which comments pertain to each issue. The "collapse children" links on the list view page are supposed to enable you to see only the top-level issues and selectively ignore their children."
[edit] Comparison to other software
It's sort of like Wikipedia in that it lets a large number of contributors collaborate to write a document, but it's different in that the actual editorial control is actually in the hands of a small group of people (FSF), rather than being a document that anyone can edit. So not everyone can edit it, but anyone can comment, sort of like on Slashdot.
But it's different from Slashdot too in that all the comments pertain to revising the document -- deciding what to change, delete, or keep -- for the sole purpose of steering the document into what will be its final draft state.
[edit] [How a group arrives at a consensus (category)]
Consensus is achieved by commenting, reading and replying to other people's comments, and also by voting "agree"/"disagree" on various propositions.
Then the drafters try to group similar comments together into "issues" and they referrer to such "reports" as they work on the next draft.
