phpwiki-talk

[Phpwiki-talk] hold on checkins

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

I'm putting together the 1.3.3 release right now, please don't check 
anything else in until it's out. Thx.

~swain

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3 likely tomorrow

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

I'll be sure to remember to leave out configurator.php. Thanks for 
taking care of the French updates!

~swain

Carsten Klapp wrote:
> 
> A few issues to resolve before the 1.3.3 release:
> 
> * The unfinished configurator.php script in the base directory should 
> NOT be included. This will take me a few days to finish the basic 
> functions, and it should be tested thoroughly and any security concerns 
> addressed before including it in any release.
> 
> * css files in the base directory: Anyone have concerns about moving 
> these into themes/default? (They do seem to work ok when inside the 
> default theme directory.)
> 
> * French updates from Roland - I'm working on these now, should be done 
> in an hour or so.
> 
> Carsten
> 
> 
> On Friday, February 22, 2002, at 09:52  am, Steve Wainstead wrote:
> 
>> I will probably roll out a version 1.3.3 tomorrow sometime. If you 
>> can, check in anything you want before early tomorrow afternoon EST. 
>> (Dunno the GMT on that, probably about 11:00 GMT).
>>
>> ~swain
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3 likely tomorrow

[Carsten K. <car...@ma...>]

A few issues to resolve before the 1.3.3 release:

* The unfinished configurator.php script in the base directory should NOT 
be included. This will take me a few days to finish the basic functions, 
and it should be tested thoroughly and any security concerns addressed 
before including it in any release.

* css files in the base directory: Anyone have concerns about moving these 
into themes/default? (They do seem to work ok when inside the default 
theme directory.)

* French updates from Roland - I'm working on these now, should be done in 
an hour or so.

Carsten


On Friday, February 22, 2002, at 09:52  am, Steve Wainstead wrote:

> I will probably roll out a version 1.3.3 tomorrow sometime. If you can, 
> check in anything you want before early tomorrow afternoon EST. (Dunno 
> the GMT on that, probably about 11:00 GMT).
>
> ~swain

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3 likely tomorrow

[Roland <rol...@fr...>]

Steve Wainstead a =E9crit :
>=20
> I will probably roll out a version 1=2E3=2E3 tomorrow sometime=2E If you c=
an,
> check in anything you want before early tomorrow afternoon EST=2E (Dunno
> the GMT on that, probably about 11:00 GMT)=2E

http://roland=2Etrique=2Efree=2Efr/phpwiki/fr=2Epo
And 3 files there :
http://roland=2Etrique=2Efree=2Efr/phpwiki/pgsrc/new/

Checked against today's nighly build=2E=2E=2E

A+


--=20
Un chat dans les bras de quelqu'un est plus intelligent qu'un chat
pos=E9 par terre, gr=E2ce =E0 la transmission=2E
           ("Br=E8ves de comptoir", J=2EM=2E Gourio)

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] Hi [Regarding PHPTwiki]

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

Lawrence Akka schrieb:
> At 16:27 20/02/2002, you wrote:
> >As an aside, it should be possible to test for the exsistence of the
> >function dba_open and trap the error, and send the user a meaningful
> >message ("you do not have DBM support compiled into your version of PHP,
> >go talk to your admin"). This has always been our #1 problem with the
> >default install.
> >
> >I have often wondered if moving to a default of a flat file database
> >wouldn't alleviate this problem; but then, what directory can we write to
> >on Windows boxen?
> 
> Are you suggesting that Windows has any sort of control over who writes to
> directories????

Sure! NTFS has even better control than most unix filesystems. (ACL's)
Its just a fact that nobody uses that.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] gui configuration of index.php

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

Jeff Dairiki schrieb:
> I haven't looked at PHPweather, but have used Gallery
> (http://gallery.sf.net/) which also has an on-line config system.
> Here, to the best of my recollection, is how Gallery handles some of these
> issues.
> 
> There one has to run a shell script (on the server) to enable configuration
> mode.  The script changes some file permissions (and maybe adjusts .htaccess
> files, and I don't know what all else.)  Then you fire up you browser and
> point it to your index.php.  In configuration mode, you can only configure
> --- all the regular functionality is disabled.   Once you're done
> configurating, you need to run a second shell script to put things in run
> mode.

this is fine, but gallery is very hard to setup with php_value safe_mode on.
I'll have to patch it to use the correct UID's, and php_value open_basedir
must be also changed to point to the config dir also.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

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

Malcolm Ross Kinsella Ryan schrieb:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:47:07AM -0800, Adam Shand wrote:
> > well i just did some reseach.  (( doesn't appear anywhere in the main
> > phpwiki wiki.  it appears once on my personaltelco wiki and four times
> > on meatball.  all instances are ((situations like) this) or math like
> > this ((4+7)*6).  since none of those should match ((.*)) we should be
> > fairly safe.
> 
> What about ((4+7) * (3+3))?

not to forget lisp and esp. scheme.
I have a lot of "((" situations in my acadwiki.

I'm for "<!-- ...\n... -->", not displayed to the user, or 
"//" on col 1
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] Re: Info page (was Re: [phpwiki-checkins] CVS: phpwiki/lib main.php,1.55,1.56)

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

Jeff Dairiki schrieb:
> "Size" is kind of useless to anyone except possibly an admin.  You
> can get a good idea of the size just by browsing the page --- if that's
> not good enough for you, ViewSource or edit it.

well, we needed it for a community project on our local wiki, 
where we had to write a text with 80000 chars. (will be published as book 
article about the austrian internet culture this year)

My size (charcount + wordcount) hacks into PageInfo were very useful then.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

[Phpwiki-talk] Re: [phpwiki-checkins] CVS: phpwiki/themes/default/templates top.tmpl,1.8,1.9

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

Jeff Dairiki schrieb:
> I does look nasty.  I've recently received private request for help from two
> different parties who were completely unable to figure out on their own how
> to make minor modifications to the templates (e.g. add their own logo.)  We
> need to strive to make the templates look more like simple HTML than PHP
> code, so that those who know only HTML won't be completely lost in them.

maybe another simple html based template, with no php vars?
maybe the old ###VAR### stuff again?

> I think it might help to have a separate theme for the static HTML pages.
> Then none of those globals are necessary.  (The theme replaces the templates
> instead.)  (They shouldn't be globals in any case --- pass them to the
> templates as template args (like $revision).)
> I would guess that most people who want to make static dumps are going
> to want to adjust/customize the format of the dumps anyway...

Hmm. I would vote against that. If I do a static dump I want to have it look 
like my custom template. (my logo, my arrangement, ...)
Just the links and forms should be fixed.
-- 
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

[Phpwiki-talk] mirror, mirror

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

http://tavi.sourceforge.net/TaviFeatures

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3 likely tomorrow

[<ph...@de...>]

On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 09:52:20 -0500, Steve Wainstead
<sw...@pa...> wrote:
=> I will probably roll out a version 1.3.3 tomorrow sometime.

	Hooray!  Hooray!  Hooray!  <grin>

	Thank you,

	- Don

[Phpwiki-talk] demo (alpha) site cleanup

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

Hey Carsten,

I noticed this morning that I'd broken a lot of links on the demo site, 
so I did an M-x grep-find on the demo site tree and cleaned up all I 
could find. You may want to take a look yourself; I think I got 
everything. Shell into SF and you can do

cd demo
find . -type f |xargs grep alpha

for a list of all remaining files with the work "alpha" in them.

cheers
~swain

[Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3 likely tomorrow

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

I will probably roll out a version 1.3.3 tomorrow sometime. If you can, 
check in anything you want before early tomorrow afternoon EST. (Dunno 
the GMT on that, probably about 11:00 GMT).

~swain

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] how to use categories? (with small attachment)

[Marcel v. d. B. <ma...@hs...>]

We use categories with the Category:Categoryname syntax  and the 
FullTextSearch plugin to generate pages with the pages which belong to a 
certain category.  For us we made a little change to the FullTextSearch 
plugin (which is attached)

So what we do is:

1.  At the bottom of a page we include the text Category:CategoryName 
which is linked as per the configuration in the interwiki.map file (we 
let it link to a page called "CategoryCategoryName")
2. On the page "CategoryCategoryName"  we include the following:

--snip--
This page contains a list of documents in the Category:CategoryName 
category:

<?plugin FullTextSearch s="Category:CategoryName" noheader=1 onlytitle=1 
?>  

or

<?plugin FullTextSearch s="Category:Development -Category:Category" 
noheader=1 onlytitle=1 ?>

The latter will not show the main Category page which lists all categories.

The "onlytitle" parameter is the one we added to the plugin: if set to 1 
the plugin only returns the names of the pages and not the text found in 
the page itself.  I've attached the modified plugin. As this was a very 
simple and quick hack to the module I don't know if this is of general 
interest to include in the distribution, but here it 's attached.

We also have a Category:Empty page which lists all the non-categorized 
pages. In this case the plugin like looks like:

<?plugin FullTextSearch s="-Category:" noheader=1 onlytitle=1 ?>

Notice the minus sign? This will give a list of pages NOT containing the 
string "Category:"

Marcel

Roel Vanhout wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>While looking for documentation on the phpwiki site I noticed that there
>seems to be a concept of categories - how do I use these? How do I
>create one, and how do I add pages to a category? Is there a standard
>way to get a list of all categories? And from what version on does this
>work? Thanks!
>
>cheers,
>
>roel
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Phpwiki-talk mailing list
>Php...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpwiki-talk
>

-- 
Marcel van der Boom
HS-Development BV
Kwartiersedijk 14B
Fijnaart, The Netherlands
Tel. : 0168-468822
Fax. : 0168-468823
Email: ma...@hs...

[Phpwiki-talk] alpha -> demo

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

OK gang, alpha site is now the demo site. What does this mean?

The demo site will be updated nightly by cron, but the database for the
demo site will not. So content going into the demo site will stay there.

The test site will be completely erased and rebuilt every night.

I haven't decided on moving the main site up to phpwiki.sf.net. Any
suggestions? I'm inclined to leave it the way it is. There are many links
that would need changing if this were moved... well, a redirect would
solve it for now, but...

~swain

---
                  http://www.panix.com/~swain/
"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring
production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
                     -- Frank Zappa

[Phpwiki-talk] test site up

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

OK, step one in place. The test site now takes over the purpose of the
alpha site, namely, as a test site that is wiped clean every night.

Here it is, warts and all:

http://phpwiki.sourceforge.net/test/

Actually there are some warts from copying alpha site's index.php. I'll
take care of that.

~swain

---
                  http://www.panix.com/~swain/
"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring
production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
                     -- Frank Zappa

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

[<mal...@cs...>]

On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:47:07AM -0800, Adam Shand wrote:
> 
> well i just did some reseach.  (( doesn't appear anywhere in the main
> phpwiki wiki.  it appears once on my personaltelco wiki and four times
> on meatball.  all instances are ((situations like) this) or math like
> this ((4+7)*6).  since none of those should match ((.*)) we should be
> fairly safe.

What about ((4+7) * (3+3))?

Malcolm

-- 
Malcolm Ryan - mal...@cs... - http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~malcolmr/
  AI Dept, CSE, UNSW, Australia, Phone: +61 2 9385-6906 Fax: +61 2 9385-4936

           "He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good,
           and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." - Matt 5:45

[Phpwiki-talk] Praises for PhpWiki (Fwd: wiki themes)

[Carsten K. <car...@ma...>]

Here's some nice feedback about PhpWiki I received today to share with =
the=20
whole team. Everyone, give yourselves a virtual pat on the back for a =
job=20
well done!

:-) Carsten

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Oliver <ol...@ar...>
> Date: Thu Feb 21, 2002  03:11:09  pm America/Montreal
> To: <car...@ma...>
> Subject: wiki themes
>
> Dear Carsten
>
> Just a note to say that I think the work you and the rest of the =
phpwiki=20
> programming team has done is great.
>
> We are small Arts Council in western New York and because of the =
efforts=20
> of your scripts we are able to have our staff, and as time goes by, =
more=20
> and more of the community easily input their work and comment on line.
>
> Our office only has macs so you can imagine that we appreciate the mac =
os=20
> themes.
>
>
> http://bigsplat.net
> http://bigsplat.net/artifacts/
>
>
> Jeff Dairiki came to our rescue with the RawHtml plugin so that means =
we=20
> have been able to convert ArtiFacts to 1.3.2 - .We don't need to use =
it=20
> much - just in order have some images land predictably - Jeff said =
that=20
> he found Artifacts appealing in its non wiki ish use - I like it =
because=20
> the 5 or so writers who are 40 =A0+ can compile this thing ahead of =
time in=20
> the Library Page. Given that in time we should be able to search on =
our=20
> archives will be very useful.
>
> once again
>
> thank you
> Oliver Dow
>
> --
>
> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Chautauqua County's http://BigSplat.net
>
> Free Email and Web Sites
>
> Complete Local Information
>
>
>
>

Re: not splitting up commits (was Re: [Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3; and towards 1.4)

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

No problem... if you want to continue the way you do it (i.e. you find 
it more useful) I can just create a new mail filter to jam the mail from 
  phpwiki-checkins to a different folder. Which I will do anyhow. :-)

~swain

Carsten Klapp wrote:
> 
> Hi Steve,
> 
> I noticed Project Builder does split up cvs commits by directory, even 
> if I only do one commit with files highlighted across multiple 
> directories. Sometimes I do commit from the command-line, but for me 
> doing multiple commits is quicker in the gui especially when there are 
> other scattered modified files which are not ready to commit yet (or 
> will never be committed).
> 
> Honestly I had been making the effort to intentionally split up commits 
> when the comments are a little different for each of the files, so that 
> inspection of cvs logs (hidden away as Get Info in Project Builder's 
> Project menu) for individual files describe only the changes to that 
> particular file.
> 
> So to reduce the number of commit emails I'm happy to use the shell more 
> often when doing commits, and to avoid splitting up commits just for the 
> sake of comments, unless say, it's very significant change to code and 
> not just css or html template files.
> 
> Thanks for bringing this up.
> 
> :-) Carsten
> 
> 
> On Thursday, February 21, 2002, at 10:40  am, Steve Wainstead wrote:
> 
>>
>> Carsten, not to publicly flog you, but one of the reasons I've fallen 
>> behind on the CVS list is because of the volume of checkins you make. 
>> (Oh that all open source projects had such a complaint! :-) I have 
>> been wondering: if you make the same change to 10 different files, do 
>> you check in each one individually? It looked that way to me in the 
>> past. I haven't tried coding PhpWiki in ProjectBuilder yet, and it 
>> wouldn't suprise me if there were no way to do this (check in ten 
>> files at once). We could teach you to check in from the Terminal app 
>> and possibly save you a lot of work.
>>
>> cheers
>> ~swain
> 
> 
> 
> 

not splitting up commits (was Re: [Phpwiki-talk] 1.3.3; and towards 1.4)

[Carsten K. <car...@ma...>]

Hi Steve,

I noticed Project Builder does split up cvs commits by directory, even if 
I only do one commit with files highlighted across multiple directories. 
Sometimes I do commit from the command-line, but for me doing multiple 
commits is quicker in the gui especially when there are other scattered 
modified files which are not ready to commit yet (or will never be 
committed).

Honestly I had been making the effort to intentionally split up commits 
when the comments are a little different for each of the files, so that 
inspection of cvs logs (hidden away as Get Info in Project Builder's 
Project menu) for individual files describe only the changes to that 
particular file.

So to reduce the number of commit emails I'm happy to use the shell more 
often when doing commits, and to avoid splitting up commits just for the 
sake of comments, unless say, it's very significant change to code and not 
just css or html template files.

Thanks for bringing this up.

:-) Carsten


On Thursday, February 21, 2002, at 10:40  am, Steve Wainstead wrote:

>
> Carsten, not to publicly flog you, but one of the reasons I've fallen 
> behind on the CVS list is because of the volume of checkins you make. (Oh 
> that all open source projects had such a complaint! :-) I have been 
> wondering: if you make the same change to 10 different files, do you 
> check in each one individually? It looked that way to me in the past. I 
> haven't tried coding PhpWiki in ProjectBuilder yet, and it wouldn't 
> suprise me if there were no way to do this (check in ten files at once). 
> We could teach you to check in from the Terminal app and possibly save 
> you a lot of work.
>
> cheers
> ~swain

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

[Steve W. <sw...@pa...>]

Finally, we should consider whether this is just programmer gold 
plating. I think we should have three good reasons to have comment 
blocks in Wiki markup.

Oh, and to muddy the waters further (and continue to reinvent HTML), 
comments could optionally render as HTML comments on the other end.

yuck
~swain

Lawrence Akka wrote:
> At 16:37 21/02/2002, you wrote:
> 
>> Lawrence Akka said:
>> > Anyway, people  should not have to use <pre> for code
>> > blocks if they don't want to (even if  it *is* a good idea).
>>
>> If we adopt the new markup they will have to.  Otherwise their
>> code will get run together in one big paragraph.
> 
> 
> Oh yes.  I'd forgotten that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> > Also, whilst I'm on this rant, why should comments not be multiline?
>> > Would  it be useful to be able to comment out large blocks of wikitext,
>> > without  actually deleting it?  They could be picked up by the block
>> > parser, and the  inline parser, couldn't they?
>>
>> As long as we make them either block-level or inline-level the parsers
>> will be able to deal with them fairly easily.  (I.e. if we make them
>> inline ((so that you can do this)), then they will not be allowed to
>> span paragraphs.)
> 
> 
> What I had in mind was the
> {{ability to
> do this }}
> sort of {{thing}}
> 
> 
> 
>> I'm not sure we want to make it too easy to comment large blocks of
>> text anyway.  Comments as instructions to the editor are good, I
>> think.  Comments as a place to store work in progress (or whatever)
>> are a bad idea (on a wiki).  Either just show the work in progress,
>> or put it on it's own page....
> 
> 
> Actually, I think I agree with that (happens sometimes, you know)
> 
> L
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Phpwiki-talk mailing list
> Php...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpwiki-talk
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

[Adam S. <ad...@pe...>]

> Well, I'll be the curmudgeon here and voice two objections: one, the 
> comment will appear in the HTML source and likely won't make any sense 
> to the end user who views it (and won't know it came from the Wiki 

my assumption was that anyone who was viewing the html source was
probably smart enough to investigate :-)

> markup); and two, we are arbitrarily letting some HTML through and not 
> others, like <i> and its kin; so we now send a confusing message to end 
> users ("HTML is not allowed! Use HTML comments for your Wiki markup!")

i thought the new markup did allow very simple html (ie. <b>,<i>,<em>,
etc) which is why i suggested it.
 
> My preference would be for Wiki-specific comment tags; but thinking of 
> Ari's approach, there is no equivalent in the course of normal writing 
> (except "asides" like this statement in parentheses).
> 
> Maybe ((I am a comment)) would suffice. Flame me as you must.

that's kinda nice though.  i always forgot to step back from it and
think "what's the most wiki way to do this" and should be fairly
unlikely to happen accidentally.

well i just did some reseach.  (( doesn't appear anywhere in the main
phpwiki wiki.  it appears once on my personaltelco wiki and four times
on meatball.  all instances are ((situations like) this) or math like
this ((4+7)*6).  since none of those should match ((.*)) we should be
fairly safe.

also, i did want to say to everyone here.  one of the reasons i like
phpwiki is that it really trys to keep things wiki and keep things
simple while progressing onto new features.  i love all the features in
twiki (and moin is getting there) but they are getting aesthetically
ugly and over complicated.  usemod i think is the "most true wiki" but
it's a little featureless for my tastes.

anyway, just wanted to say thanks, i think ya'll strike pretty much the
perfect balance with phpwiki and i'm happy to do my (very) little part
to help out.

adam.

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

[Lawrence A. <la...@us...>]

At 16:37 21/02/2002, you wrote:
>Lawrence Akka said:
> > Anyway, people  should not have to use <pre> for code
> > blocks if they don't want to (even if  it *is* a good idea).
>
>If we adopt the new markup they will have to.  Otherwise their
>code will get run together in one big paragraph.

Oh yes.  I'd forgotten that.




> > Also, whilst I'm on this rant, why should comments not be multiline?
> > Would  it be useful to be able to comment out large blocks of wikitext,
> > without  actually deleting it?  They could be picked up by the block
> > parser, and the  inline parser, couldn't they?
>
>As long as we make them either block-level or inline-level the parsers
>will be able to deal with them fairly easily.  (I.e. if we make them
>inline ((so that you can do this)), then they will not be allowed to
>span paragraphs.)

What I had in mind was the
{{ability to
do this }}
sort of {{thing}}



>I'm not sure we want to make it too easy to comment large blocks of
>text anyway.  Comments as instructions to the editor are good, I
>think.  Comments as a place to store work in progress (or whatever)
>are a bad idea (on a wiki).  Either just show the work in progress,
>or put it on it's own page....

Actually, I think I agree with that (happens sometimes, you know)

L

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

[Jeff D. <da...@da...>]

Lawrence Akka said:
> Anyway, people  should not have to use <pre> for code
> blocks if they don't want to (even if  it *is* a good idea).

If we adopt the new markup they will have to.  Otherwise their
code will get run together in one big paragraph.

> Also, whilst I'm on this rant, why should comments not be multiline?
> Would  it be useful to be able to comment out large blocks of wikitext,
> without  actually deleting it?  They could be picked up by the block
> parser, and the  inline parser, couldn't they?

As long as we make them either block-level or inline-level the parsers
will be able to deal with them fairly easily.  (I.e. if we make them
inline ((so that you can do this)), then they will not be allowed to
span paragraphs.)

I'm not sure we want to make it too easy to comment large blocks of
text anyway.  Comments as instructions to the editor are good, I
think.  Comments as a place to store work in progress (or whatever)
are a bad idea (on a wiki).  Either just show the work in progress,
or put it on it's own page....

Re: [Phpwiki-talk] comment syntax?

[Lawrence A. <la...@us...>]

I'll join Steve on the pyre, now he's put his hand in the fire.

I can't see any need at all to allow comments through to the browser.  I 
can just about see the use of comments in the wiki source.  I would not 
like the markup to resemble comments in most other languages eg c++ or php, 
because people who use wiki's for source documentation will be confused by 
text disappearing!  I don't think that disallowing comments in <pre> blocks 
helps - indeed I think it makes it even more confusing.  Anyway, people 
should not have to use <pre> for code blocks if they don't want to (even if 
it *is* a good idea).  And if they don't, they should not find that their 
source code comments have vanished.  It takes enough effort to get people 
to put them in the first place!

So ....

Since comments are only likely to be used by people who know what they are 
doing, we can afford for the markup to be a little unintuitive.  How about 
something like {{comment}}.  (Someone is about to tell me that that is a 
how you define a function in xyz language, no doubt)

Also, whilst I'm on this rant, why should comments not be multiline?  Would 
it be useful to be able to comment out large blocks of wikitext, without 
actually deleting it?  They could be picked up by the block parser, and the 
inline parser, couldn't they?

Lawrence



At 16:04 21/02/2002, you wrote:

>Adam Shand wrote:
>>>>ah, i was orgininally thinking that we could just enable the comment
>>>>html tag and let it pass through to the browser since it won't be seen.
>>>>it didn't occur to me that there was a simpler alternative :)
>>>Ooh.  We could do that, too.  Still not a problem, I think, as long as
>>>the comment text is htmlspecialchar()ed ('<' -> '&lt;').
>>if it can be done without security risks then that would be my vote. the 
>>information isn't secret, just not displayed, so we may as well pass
>>it to the browser, it might be useful for something.
>
>Well, I'll be the curmudgeon here and voice two objections: one, the 
>comment will appear in the HTML source and likely won't make any sense to 
>the end user who views it (and won't know it came from the Wiki markup); 
>and two, we are arbitrarily letting some HTML through and not others, like 
><i> and its kin; so we now send a confusing message to end users ("HTML is 
>not allowed! Use HTML comments for your Wiki markup!")
>
>My preference would be for Wiki-specific comment tags; but thinking of 
>Ari's approach, there is no equivalent in the course of normal writing 
>(except "asides" like this statement in parentheses).
>
>Maybe ((I am a comment)) would suffice. Flame me as you must.
>
>~swain
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Phpwiki-talk mailing list
>Php...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpwiki-talk