>cut..
>>That comments can be added to any Toledo Wish List item is surely a good thing, but it does suffer from a couple of deficiencies as I see it.
>>1) The list itself is almost hidden, being well out of the way and two levels down;
>>2) The comment feature is a little difficult to work with and its presentation takes a lot of space, likely making many comments difficult to absorb.
>>
>>Being out of the way is likely a necessity for such a large list, but the question it raises is why need it only be out of the way???
>>Being out of the way instantly limits who will access it. Sure, all can access it, but I bet that many don't. You've gotta select a list box item called "Visual FoxPro Zone", then select "Toldeo Wish List", and then you finally have the last 50 wish items viewable. My guess is that the majority don't go there.
>>
>>I think there is something that could be done to significantly improve the accessibility and visibility of each individual wish. . .
>>Since each wish now has a "Area" and "Sub-area" column pair it would not be difficult to map these to existing VFP forum categories. Then the UT could replicate the wish ,automatically generating a new thread within the (mapped) category. This would guarantee full exposure of the wish.
>>Then each reply to that thread could similarly be replicated into the wish comments area, stripping out the quoted lines to make it exactly as it is today.
>>
>>Having this full exposure would do much to improve the content of the wish list:
>>1) Redundancies would likely be (almost) eliminated;
>>2) Some wishes might well be eliminated, either because respondents might show that there already is a similar feature or that the desired result is achievable with a small combination of commands/actions;
>>3) Most wishes would be improved by virtue of wide discussion contributing additional thoughts or questioning things that would serve to clarify the wish.
>>
>>It also might then not be a huge step to incorporate a special header or footer into the generated thread, carried forward with each reply, to allow the respondent to "vote" his/her relative importance rating (from a fixed list of 4 or 5 choices) for that wish.
>>And since the name of each contributor of any message is known it would be a simple matter to keep a record of only their last "vote" on any wish.
>>
>cut...
>>Thanks for listening.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>
>
>Any request for improving UT should be added to
>the UT Task Tracker or directed to Michel Fournier.
>
>HTH

He has it already. Just giving it a little more exposure < S >