It sounds like Comments works for everyone as name for this module. Let's rename it and refer to it as such. @Jakub Skoczen, what's the procedure for this?

This is an interesting idea and one that came up when we initially discussed notes with the UM SIG. The reason why they felt the Comments (Notes) component as currently designed didn't work for them was that they wanted the notes to be co-located with certain fields. But if there was a way to create and view notes in a more co-located fashion while also logging them in the Comments feature, that might be cool. That said, the UM and RA SIGs also wanted to be able to configure notes to automatically "pop up" on the user record (if there is something very important that needs to be remembered/communicated). Let's gather the detailed requirements first and after that decide if there is any way the existing Comments feature could be used.

I'd like to hear what the other POs, particularly @Dennis Bridges, think, as they are farther along with notes requirements than the SIGs I've been working with.

"Comments" sound good and fairly generic. As far as field-level notes are concerned we don't have anything implemented yet. But it would be conceptually possible to extend the current notes features with a function to scope a note to a field (or subfield) within the record and retain the existing mechanics.

Okay. I'm sold on Comments. It definitely rolls off the tongue better than Discussion.

I don't know if we have yet implemented any of the Patron Notes fields. It might need to be its own Module / plugin / feature.