[pmwiki-users] Nested Blocks (tables, divs, etc)

[noskule]

Patrick R. Michaud schrieb:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 04:39:50PM +0000, Ed W wrote:
>   
>> Hi, I am looking through the code in stdmarkup.php, in particular the 
>> Cells function and wondering why we don't offer (automatic) nested 
>> tables/divs, etc?
>>     
>
> The reason PmWiki works the way it does is that I didn't want
> to require (:...end:) tags on every construct, especially for
> non-nested constructs.  For example, if we had automatically nested
> tables/divs, then what is now
>
>     (:div:)
>     first division
>     (:div:)
>     second division
>     (:div:)
>     third division
>     (:divend:)
>
> would end up being
>
>     (:div:)
>     first division
>     (:divend:)
>     (:div:)
>     second division
>     (:divend:)
>     (:div:)
>     third division
>     (:divend:)
>
> It gets even worse for things like nested (:if:) constructs
> and the like:
>
>     (:if ... :)
>        (:if2 ... :)
>        (:if2 ... :)
>     (:if ... :)
>        (:if2 ... :)
>     (:ifend:)
>
> becomes
>
>     (:if ... :)
>        (:if ... :)
>        (:ifend:)
>        (:if ... :)
>        (:ifend:)
>     (:ifend:)
>     (:if ... :)
>        (:if ... :)
>        (:ifend:)
>     (:ifend:)
>
> Since the non-nested cases are far more common than the nested ones,
> I've optimized the markup for that.
>
>   
>> This doesn't seem to change or break anything obvious.  We could nest 
>> divs before, now we can just do it without having to manually number them. 
>>     
>
> Changing this in the core would break a _lot_ of stuff, as evidenced
> by the examples above.
>
> Pm
>   
Way not just make it configurable? In my case  for example it's far more 
hassle to keep control over the numbering cause I work a lot with 
includes and sections.



> _______________________________________________
> pmwiki-users mailing list
> pmwiki-users at pmichaud.com
> http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
>
>