Just a bump on this post. I am really perplexed about how to solve
this. Would like feedback from the community. It's a pressing problem.
My inclination is to simply not flip the array before sending it to
the engine, and require the user to use {+field} and {+value} for
their display. That's easy enough. It would just break every site
using info reports.
I have thought of the possibility of trying to remap all the possible
values (p, p0, p1, page, etc) to the opposite value, but the more
complex it gets, the more messy it will be.
I have also thought of tagging each value with an invisible marker
like somevalue~27, somevalue~28, etc. And then strip them off in the
final output. That could solve the problem, but of course whatever tag
we used could not be inserted in the value or there would be new
problems.
It's not really 3.xx, but a late 2.xx problem. Still we need to fix it.
Cheers,
Dan
> 2009/4/5 Linly <[email protected]>:
>>
>> Hmm, not working.
>>
>> The info page is something like this:
>>
>> writing.blog.1218975513: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1219136897: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1219403337: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1222142971: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1222436683: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1222620533: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1223031493: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1223563576: ezDone
>> writing.blog.1224152764: ezTodo
>> writing.blog.1224675632: ezDone
>> ...
>>
>> I change the code from "inlist" to "equal"
>>
>> [(info report if="equal 'ezTodo' {info.{p1}.{p2}::{+p}}" target=info.
>> {p1}.{p2} sort=lastmodified template=eztodo#eztodo)]
>>
>> This code worked in 2.72, and failed in 2.73. In 2.73, no matter how
>> many pages matched, it output only one result.
2009/4/5 The Editor <[email protected]>:
> Oh no. A major problem. To get the info function to tap into the
> templating engine, I really wanted to have the field be the page
> names, and the value the index of the array sent out. So I flipped it.
> But when the values are the same, that will crunch out the duplicates
> (all must have unique indexes). Not sure how to fix it.
>
> One is to not flip the array (we can use {+field} and {+value}, but
> not {+p}. Actually, {+p} would refer now to the value, and would give
> you access to {+p1}, {+p2} automatically. Just what you have been
> wanting for awhile. But we'd lost access to page parts for the field
> (like writing, blog or timestamp) without some other special code.
>
> There might be other options I'm not thinking of. Open to suggestions.
> Will probably wait a bit to fix this till I'm sure I have a good
> solution. Sorry I don't have an instant answer Linly! :) So much for
> a flawless 3.xx launch...
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"BoltWire" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/boltwire?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
