Auto-Glossary links

[oiuyt]

It looks like we now have automated link creation for glossary terms such as advance

I don't know that this is a great idea, especially as the glossary builds. If I have a different definition of a word (and advance is a great example where the gloassary's definition isn't universally accepted) this automated link has now changed the meaning of my post. And we can clutter posts up with all kinds of unnecessary, needless, inessential, uncalled-for, and dispensable links that we just don't need.

As a suggestion to retain the presumably desired functionality, I'd recommend the creation of a new icon that can be automatically inserted next to glossary-defined words the has the same effect as the current link. While this icons (presumably very small) will still clutter the post and can still act as a distraction (so those problems persist), at least it's clear that it was done by someone other than the poster.

-B

[oiuyt]

Another gloassary suggestion: Have it be browseable. I don't know how many items are in the glossary, nor do I have good sense of what's there ("aids" is, "balestra" isn't -- which of these is it more useful to have a standardized definition of?).

-B

[oiuyt]

Ooooh, even better reason not to like this new feature.... taken from an editing comment in one of Ordway's posts:

Edited to change "in advance " to "ahead of time" - attack of the weird out-of-context glossary feature!


-B

[chefencer]

I like the idea behind the glossary, but I concur with Mr. O. on the auto-feature. People should know in advance if they want to take advantage of the latest advance in the technology of the forum. There are plenty of times when they could advance their point with appropriate glossary links, but used in an automated fashion it might advance the wrong meaning or agenda...

Just advance ing my $.02

[Neil]

It looks like we now have automated link creation for glossary terms such as advance

I don't know that this is a great idea, especially as the glossary builds. If I have a different definition of a word (and advance is a great example where the gloassary's definition isn't universally accepted) this automated link has now changed the meaning of my post. And we can clutter posts up with all kinds of unnecessary, needless, inessential, uncalled-for, and dispensable links that we just don't need.

Here here. I hate those links with a passion. You find them a lot in wikipedia articles. It's distracting and, in the vast majority of cases, not helpful.

As a suggestion to retain the presumably desired functionality, I'd recommend the creation of a new icon that can be automatically inserted next to glossary-defined words the has the same effect as the current link. While this icons (presumably very small) will still clutter the post and can still act as a distraction (so those problems persist), at least it's clear that it was done by someone other than the poster.

-B

I think it would be better to get rid of it altogether. Or if there has to be something, maybe have an automatically generated list of words (that appear in both the post and the glossary) appear at the bottom of the post.

[Craig]

I removed the cross posting of glossary links into forum posts. I had only put in a few words from another article and will go ahead and pull in the glossary terms that I have.

Craig