[Pmwiki-users] Major change to layout code likely (again!)
Patrick R. Michaud
pmichaud
Sun Feb 22 13:48:29 CST 2004
On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 02:40:55PM -0600, John Feezell wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 13:10:56 -0700, Patrick R. Michaud
> >
> >I agree on both points (1. it *is* a small nitpick :-), and 2. HTML
> >comments as section delimiters might not be the best choice). I just
> >used them because they look good in the HTML markup and it was
> >convenient.
> >It's easy enough for me to change it or add a different delimiter
> >sequence if someone will propose some alternatives.
>
> <Pm++ bhah, bhah, bhah ++>
> with Pm for PmWiki Markup of course ;)>.
Heh, cute. I guess I should put some parameters/constraints on the
template section markup---
1. If we're not going to use HTML comments (<!--PageHeaderFmt-->) because
they might not be displayed by an HTML generation tool such as
DreamWeaver, then we should avoid angle brackets altogether for the
section markup as those tools may try to correct/validate them as
valid HTML.
2. The use of <!--PageHeaderFmt--> is nice because it can still appear
unchanged in the HTML output that PmWiki generates. However, it's
no problem for me to convert some other sequence we might
define (e.g. [!--PageHeaderFmt--]) into <!--PageHeaderFmt--> when
it's output.
...and having just written that, perhaps [!--PageHeaderFmt--],
[!--PageTitleFmt--], etc. is the alternative we're looking for? PmWiki
would accept either [!--PageHeaderFmt--] or <!--PageHeaderFmt-->
in the template, but would always generate <!--PageHeaderFmt--> in the
HTML output.
Any ...ahem... comments? (sorry, bad pun!)
Pm
More information about the pmwiki-users
mailing list