Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on It should be more clear what comment an attribution belongs to

Post

It should be more clear what comment an attribution belongs to

+5
−0

Consider the following screenshot from the middle of a longer comment thread:

Screenshot of part of comment thread

So which text was written by Monica Cellio, the one above or the one below the attribution line? There is no visual cue telling you. Yes, you can figure it out by going to the top or bottom of the thread. Or you may simply know it because you've seen enough comments. Or you may draw an analogy from the fact that for other post types, the name is always below the post … except that way you'll come to the wrong conclusion.

I think there should be a clear visual cue which comment the attribution belongs to. This might be by having a smaller distance to the belonging comment than to the other one. Or it could be a darker line separating the comment from the other's attribution. Or it might be a blurred boundary on the side the attribution belongs to, and a hard boundary to the other comment. Or something entirely different.

I just think currently it's a bit confusing.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

2 comment threads

One line is already darker, but clearly not enough (2 comments)
Possible missing word (2 comments)
Possible missing word
trichoplax‭ wrote about 1 month ago

Or it might be a blurred boundary of the on the side the attribution belongs to, and a hard boundary to the other comment.

I'm not quite sure if there's a word too many or too few, but it looks like there's some kind of typo around "boundary of the on the side the". I've haven't edited because I'm not sure what the correct version should be.

celtschk‭ wrote 29 days ago

I had to read twice to see it, but there are indeed two words too many. I'll edit.