Did a patch ever result from the following discussion? Jim Ottaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>> Sacha Chua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Jim Ottaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> I tried to make something like that work for the multi links, and >>> it wasn't satisfactory at all. Perhaps it is best not to try to >>> make implicit, or perhaps semi-implicit, links work in multi links >>> after all. > >> Hmm. That could work. Multi-links tend to be programmatically >> generated anyway. If planner-multi-read-name accepts a list of >> implicit links and returns a list of explicit links, then things >> should Just Work, and we can simplify the planner-multi test to just >> check for the explicit link regexp. > >> Hey, you know, that would actually be simpler and safer... > > Yes, as I discovered, trying to keep the original type of each link > gets complicated. And it's probably pointless as well: there is no > real benefit for the extra cost. -- Michael Olson -- FSF Associate Member #652 -- http://www.mwolson.org/ Interests: manga, Debian, XHTML, wiki, Emacs Lisp /` |\ | | | IRC: mwolson on freenode.net: #hcoop, #muse, #PurdueLUG |_] | \| |_| Jabber: mwolson_at_hcoop.net _______________________________________________ emacs-wiki-discuss mailing list emacs-wiki-discuss@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-wiki-discuss
