[Pmwiki-users] Re: [[include: ... ]] part of a page
Jonathan Scott Duff
duff
Wed May 5 07:58:16 CDT 2004
On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 11:31:43PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> I'm open for discussion/reactions from the group on the suggestions given
> by J. Meijer (below). Many seem plausible to me. If we followed it,
> the result might be something like:
>
> [[include:SomePage#soup]] -- everything after #soup (cf. HTML)
> [[include:SomePage#soup#nuts]] -- from #soup to #nuts
> [[include:SomePage#1#soup]] -- everything before #soup
> [[include:SomePage#soup#]] -- from #soup to the next anchor
> [[include:SomePage#1#]] -- everything up to the first anchor
> [[include:SomePage#10]] -- line 10 through end of SomePage
> [[include:SomePage#10#]] -- line 10 through the next anchor
>
> [[include:SomePage#1#10]] -- first ten lines
> [[include:SomePage#5#10]] -- lines 5 through 14
> [[include:SomePage#soup#1]] -- one line starting with #soup
> [[include:SomePage#soup#5]] -- five lines starting with #soup
I like it! Though there is a bit of broken symmetry between the solely
numeric and solely non-numeric anchors. (i.e. #start#end for non-numeric
versus #start#length for the numeric) But making it symmetrical sounds
like a foolish consistency to me. :-)
I'm still mildly bothered by end point inclusion for
[[include:SomePage#soup#nuts]] (don't know why it's just stuck on my
brain) As a feature suggestion, perhaps [[include:SomePage#soup##nuts]]
could include the #nuts line (or vice versa if #soup#nuts already
includes the #nuts line)
Anyway, I vote in favor of this new interpretation of the include
markup.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
duff at pobox.com
More information about the pmwiki-users
mailing list