[Pmwiki-users] Re: [[include: ... ]] part of a page

Patrick R. Michaud pmichaud
Tue May 4 07:44:45 CDT 2004


On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 02:47:37PM +1200, John Rankin wrote:
> >On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 04:05:54PM +0200, Christian Ridderstr?m wrote:
> >> I like the notation
> >> 	[[para:PageName#anchor]]
> >> which allows me to include only a single paragraph from a page, and I'd
> >> like to assign this to [[include:PageName#anchor]].
> >
> >I'm working on an implementation, but the above brings up a question--
> >what constitutes a "paragraph" in the above?  Which of the following
> >is (or should be) a "paragraph" in Christian's sense of the
> >word...
> >  - just the markup line containing the anchor
> >  - all lines from the markup line containing the anchor up to the
> >    next line containing some other anchor
> >  - all lines from the markup line containing the anchor up to the
> >    next blank line
> 
> I think we can discount 2, because that would be 
>   [[include:Page#from#to]] 
> if I interpret Christian's proposal correctly. 

Not exactly, because [[include:SomePage#from#to]] assumes that the author
writing the include already knows what markup follows the #from section
(i.e., the #to).  The advantage of 2 is that the author can name a
section [[include:SomePage#from]] without having to know what anchor
follows it, or that it will still do the right thing even if someone
adds additional anchors/sections to SomePage.

> FWIW, in the [[para:Page#anchor]] markup extension, 
> the code treats:
>     [[#anchor]]
>     What should be included:
> as if the author had omitted the return after [[#anchor]] 
> ie it returns "What should be included:"

Good suggestion.  I've added this interpretation to my implementation.

Pm



More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list