The way comparisons are implemented, it’s almost impossible to use them now. Every option has its own reasons, nobody tries to add the same reasons for all options (for example, pro for some, con for others). Even if reasons were similar, they are always sorted by votes. Even sorting and naming were adjusted, and reasons were the same, they just don’t fit on the screen. Only three options can be compared, with no way to choose which (they are always sorted by votes too).
All this makes comparisons unusable for comparing options. While they can be improved, I don’t see how to make them useful. However, it may be unnecessary.
Wikipedia has many comparisons where items are presented in a table: options as rows, reasons as columns and yes/no/?/some-other-short-text as cells, with optional footnotes below the table with citations and more details (both on properties and values). Comparisons can contain multiple tables, grouped by reason groups. For example:
I’d like to see this feature implemented on Slant. In order to do this, neutral reasons (properties?) need to be added on the question level. Each option can have a short value for each property, a long value (if explanation is necessary), and sources. Properties can have a detailed description to be included below the comparison table and/or in some other way ("?" with hints, for example). Properties can be grouped into property groups (can be implemented later).
On the option page, properties can be presented as a two-column table: property — value. Long values can be displayed right after short values because there’s enough space. Users can change values there, add values for properties without values etc.
But properties will truly shine when options need to be compared. With data like this, tables like on Wikipedia can be constructed. Later more prettiness can be implemented, like user being able to choose which properties to compare, searching by property values etc. Having structured data is great.