Search Ideas

The important thing is to be able to make predictions about images on the astronomers’ photographic plates, frequencies of spectral lines, and so on, and it simply doesn’t matter whether we ascribe these predictions to the physical effects of gravitational fields on the motion of planets and photons [as in pre-Einsteinian physics] or to a curvature of space and time.

I’m getting conflicting results online for this quote. Some sources that quote the same passage say singular ‘effect’, others use the plural like Deutsch does.

I don’t have access to the original text, so I can’t say for sure if this is possibly a slight misquote or if different people are just quoting different editions.

Do explanations have to be expressible?

Any filtered idea should always display only the count of shown criticisms.

Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.

An explanation could accompany the n / m display, like a title on hover.

That way, there should never be any confusion as to a mismatch between the total vs rendered number of pending criticisms.

How will people know what n / m means?

Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.

That way, there should never be any confusion as to a mismatch between the total vs rendered number of pending criticisms.

That could mislead people into thinking a revision has no pending criticisms, which would be bad for error correction.

See #1999: “People could easily miss or forget that.”

People could easily miss or forget that.

Any filtered ideas should show a criticism label displaying n / m for the count, where n is the number of rendered criticisms and m is the number of total criticisms.

That way, there’s never any confusion as to 1) whether a filtered idea has any pending criticisms, 2) a filtered idea having more criticisms than are being rendered.

See #1992: “The instructions at the top of the page are clear that not all ideas are being rendered.”

If no criticisms are being displayed, yet the label says an idea has n pending criticisms, that might confuse people. More generally, any mismatch between rendered vs counted criticisms could confuse people.

If no criticisms are being displayed, yet the label says an idea has n pending criticisms, that might confuse people.

For all ideas, the total number of pending criticisms (if any) should always be shown, even if they are not all being rendered.

The instructions at the top of the page are clear that not all ideas are being rendered.

When cycling back to the revision, it should continue to display only the count of the shown criticisms.

That could mislead people into thinking a revision has no pending criticisms.

When cycling back to the revision, it should continue to display only the count of the shown criticisms.

Bug: when cycling through ‘filtered’ revisions (meaning there are more revisions that don’t lead to the highlighted idea), the criticism badge can change count for the same revision.

Bug: when cycling through ‘filtered’ revisions (meaning there are more revisions that don’t lead to the highlighted idea), the criticism badge can change count for the same idea.

Hiccdown should have support for ids and class names in the tag symbol. Like Hiccup.

[:'div#my-id.my-class.another-class']
# => <div id="my-id" class="my-class another-class"></div>

It should also allow mixing:

[:'div#my-id.my-class.another-class', {id: 'override', class: 'additive'}]
# => <div id="override" class="my-class another-class additive"></div>

In other words, the id from the hash would override the id from the symbol, and the class from the hash would be added to the classes from the symbol.

Hiccdown methods should live in their own, separate classes. How about they are called ‘displays’?

class ProductsDisplay
  def index vc, # …
    vc.some_helper_method
  end
end

Behind the scenes, the Hiccdown gem would need to make the instance variables available to the display class:

display = @display_module.new

view_context.instance_variables.each do |iv|
  display.instance_variable_set(
    iv,
    view_context.instance_variable_get(iv)
  )
end

Then:

class ProductsDisplay
  def index vc, # …
    vc.some_helper_method(@products)
  end
end

Hiccdown methods should live in Rails helpers as class methods. That way, the problem described in #302 is solved – methods can be referenced unambiguously:

ProductsHelper.index
StoresHelper.index

Hiccdown methods should live in Rails helpers as instance methods.

Thanks!