[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