Re: [Phpwiki-talk] Misc. comments

[Reini U. <ru...@x-...>]

Jeff Dairiki schrieb:
> - the rush for new wiki markup (tables, picture floats, ...) -- I don't
> like that at all.
> 
> I'll stay out of this one, except to say: I wanted simple tables, so I added
> them. (And you're the one who added footnotes! :-) )

I've added ImageLinks. I don't like inline images either and don't want 
to see any pornpics at my wiki. but navigation is much better this way. I have 
to sell this piece to reach critical mass!

> >- ...I don't like messing with the include path. Instead I suggest
> > ... including all other files with "$phpwikidir/lib/filename.php".
> >Much easier to understand, less things to mess around. ...
> 
> Hmm. I respectfully disagree.  ini_set("include_path", "/some/where") seems
> pretty clear to me.

Hmm, I'm with Arno. 
I already hardcoded all with 
  define('WIKIROOT', "/path/to/acadwiki/");
  include WIKIROOT . "lib/...";

> >- the phpwiki code gets more and more complicated. That's against one of
> >our primary design goals (at least we had this goal some months ago).

for me it looks still okay.

> >- about the templates: some are proposing to make them more sophisticated.
> >I argue against this. The end result is (after adding loops etc.)
> >reinventing PHP or other HTML-embedded languages.
> 
> True, but we are inventing a (hopefully) simple HTML-embedded language.

templating slows phpwiki down a lot. they more markup transformations and the 
more ###templatevars### the slower it will get.

I'll experiment with if-modified-since headers if it will make it faster.

I would also need some kind of "system" flag per page, 
where a handler is asked to generate some content and editing is forbidden.

* RecentChanges which should be generated dynamically.
* or the MetaWiki Search Engine.

without this flag it could be static. but it could also be just a MESSAGE.
for the admin stuff I would rather use a abrowse.html template, 
then doing all the ###IF###.

> What do the current templates provide now that couldn't be just as easily
> provided by straight PHP files consisting of mostly HTML interspersed
> with things like "<?php echo $RELATEDPAGES; ?>"?  At least this would
> provide the opportunity to intersperse larger chunks of PHP code
> to generate tables and such.  (Answer in part to this question: one
> can not (I think) capture the output of an include("template.php") ---
> it always gets spewed straight to the client.)
 
> >In short: keep it simply. phpwiki is getting too fancy for my taste.
> 
> This is a point on which a policy decision should definitely be made.
> (Or restated, if it's already been made.)

> 1. "Simple is in the eye of the beholder."  (See above.)
> 2. The SF task list has been growing at a seemingly exponential rate.  (For the
> most part, not my doing.)  All kinds of fancy features have been discussed:
> page types, user authentication, version history.  If or when all these
> features are added, phpwiki is not going to be a small program.
>    No matter what your definition of "simplicity" is, maintaining it
> with all these features thrown in is not going to be easy.

if not phpwiki then we'll have to do a fork. (hopefully not)
I need these features, and most other wikis already have them and more.
they make sense.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/