[pmwiki-users] improved markup for floating images...?

[Patrick R. Michaud]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2005 at 10:20:05AM +0100, Ed W wrote:
> >Then we would have:
> >   Attach:image.jpg                           # floating right w/margins
> >   %float=left% Attach:image.jpg              # floating left w/margins
> >   %framed% Attach:image.jpg                  # floating right w/frame
> >   %framed% Attach:image.jpg [[<<]] caption   # floating right 
> >   ...
> >
> >In the extremely rare case that someone needs to start a line with
> >an image that acts inlined, they can write things like:
> >
> >   [==] Attach:image.jpg here is some text
> 
> Looks great, except, what does [==] do?

It's a null text marker -- [=...=] protects anything inside of it.
In this case it prevents the image from being the first item on the
line without actually generating any output.  (I did say it's rare. :-)

> I like the use of the style stuff to indicate how to style the image.  
> However, I'm not totally happy with the captioning syntax.  

As I said, the [[<<]] is just a stand-in at the moment for whatever
else that we come up with that means "break" or "place the next item
below this one".  Surely we can come up with something better ...?

> Or does anyone really need alt text which 
> is different from the caption?  

I think the answer here will be yes.

> I'm still wondering if the wikipedia way of using a start and end tag 
> around the image doesn't give some options for a "shorthand" version of 
> all the above.  ie if we disregard their choice of tag for the moment, then:
> [[Image:image.jpg|right|my caption]]
> Is actually rather easy to use?

...except I'm not sure that with something like this that "my caption"
can contain much in the way of markup.  But if you really want a
shorthand version, there's always the possibility of:

   (:image Attach:image.jpg right "my caption":)

But I'm not hugely in favor of this.

> The other thought is that you probably don't need a left and right 
> aligned WITHOUT wrapping option - you could just document some syntax 
> for a "clear:both" break and then the writer simply sticks one of those 
> in when they want one.  This might simplify some syntax?

There are times when people will want a left-image without wrapping
(think graphic titles).  But more to the point, I don't have to do
anything special for %left% and %right% above -- they already exist
and so I get them "for free".

> On the other hand it would also be nice to be able to float arbitrary 
> paragraphs and hence style them up like notes within the text.  If you 
> do put in a float syntax could it be made to apply to other block level 
> items..?  What do you think?

Well, yes, this is the whole point of wikistyles -- in the general
case they aren't specific to any tag or markup.  Thus one can do:

    >>frame float=right<<
    This text appears in a framed floating box to the right of the page.
    It can include [[links]] to other pages and '''other markup'''
    >><<

    %define=postitnote bgcolor=yellow float=right frame width=100px%

    >>postitnote<<
    Don't forget to write!
    >><<

    A paragraph can have an inlined post-it.  %postitnote% Like this! %%

Pm