On Sun, Feb 18, 2007 at 10:27:41PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I think additional directives will make pagelists easer to use. But I'd > prefer to not use (:first:), (:last:) etc, and instead go with something > like (:pagelist-first:), (:pagelist-last:). It's a bit longer to type, but > you won't be doing it that often so I don't see it as a big problem.
I think it may be too long to type. > What you gain is clarity - you won't start wondering what (:first:) > would do when not related to a pagelist. It displays as "(:first:)", of course. Just as "(:pagelist-first:)" will display as "(:pagelist-first:)" when not related to a pagelist. :-) I did think of the possibility of qualifying the directives somehow to make it clear they were for pagelists... but I didn't come up with anything I liked better than the simple (:first:), (:each:), and (:last:) choices. > (I'm ignoring that the templates can also be used with searchresults) Well, searchresults are just pagelists. There's also a bit more to it than this... I'm running into possibilities for using pagelist-like templates on things other than pagelists, such as attachlist (but there are others). So, part of me thinks we may be better of sticking with the simple (:first:)/(:each:)/(:last:) approach instead of trying to explain (:pagelist-first:) vs. (:attachlist-first:) vs. (:whatever-first:), etc. In other words, the directives may make sense in contexts other than pagelists, even if we don't know what those contexts are yet. Pm _______________________________________________ pmwiki-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
