[pmwiki-users] hierarchical groups, revisited

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 10:51:23PM +0100, Américo Albuquerque wrote:
> From: "Patrick R. Michaud"
>  > After this page is created (and has links to it from other places),
>  > someone decides that Animal.Canine should have subpages in it such as
>  > Animal.Canine.Beagle and Animal.Canine.Terrier. So, they create
>  > Animal.Canine.$GroupPage to be the home page for the canine group.
>  >
>  > What happens to the original Animal.Canine page? We can't just
>  > move its contents to Animal.Canine.$GroupPage, because then all of
>  > its links will be broken. And we can't say that /Animal/Canine
>  > is the same as /Animal/Canine/$GroupPage, because then we don't
>  > have a way to get to the contents of the original Animal.Canine page.
> I didn't say that, what I said was that the /Animal/Canine group is the
> same as saying /Animal/Canine/$GroupPage. In your example you would have
> 2 Canine pages set, the first would be /Animal/Canine and the 2n would
> be /Animal/Canine/$GroupPage. 

Ahh, *two* separate pages, each with a separate url.  (I was reading
"/Animal/Canine group" as "/Animal/Canine url" in your message, sorry.)

That goes against what most people expect, but yes, it could work
this way.  I think with this approach we'd likely end up with a
lot of "Animal.Canine" pages that contain (:redirect /Animal/Canine/Home:)
or some such, and then people would want to have a way for the wiki
to perform the redirects "automagically" instead of having to build
the extra page at each step.  But yes, I can envision that it might
be workable.

Somehow I don't see the XPath syntax for relative links as being 
very usable or desirable for the average author that PmWiki targets.
So I'd still be interested in a syntax for this.

Pm