[pmwiki-users] New {$$ } and {( )} markups [Was: Can any of the form recipes do this?]

Hans design5 at softflow.co.uk
Tue Apr 3 10:01:16 CDT 2007


Tuesday, April 3, 2007, 2:56:16 PM, Patrick wrote:

> Or, if we really think it's worthwhile to standardize {(...)},
> I propose that we go ahead and identify some standard functions
> that everyone seems to want (time, date, substr, toupper, tolower, 
> etc.) and I'll write a base recipe for it that can stand apart
> from either ZAP or Fox.  Then ZAP and Fox can extend that as needed,
> and we'll have much less opportunity for conflict with the {(...)}
> markup in the future.

I think it's worthwhile.

Fox got markup for templates using date and strftime functions.
If there is general markup {(date ....)} and {(strftime ...)}
Fox can drop its replacement code.
Would {(time ...)} call strftime?

I am happy to drop the : as well right now, since I am doing such a
big syntax change already (and require Fox users to change all their
templates now). So it would be useful to know what the date and time
(strftime) function syntax will look like.

Having {(date ..)} and {(time ...)} markup will mean it can be used in
pages, like PageVariables? That will make a lot of specialised date
and time PVs unnecessary. But it would be good to allow some
addition/subtraction math for setting future/past time events.


  ~Hans




More information about the pmwiki-users mailing list