On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 08:28:30AM +0100, Hans wrote:
> Sunday, April 15, 2007, 10:41:08 PM, Patrick wrote:
> >> >- I think {(server ...)} really ought to use the actual $_SERVER
> >> > names instead of introducing its own. Otherwise authors have
> >> > to learn a different set of names for things that already have names.
> >>
> >> Perhaps, but an admin that knew enough php to know all the server vars
> >> would probably just be doing page variables or setting up their own
> >> local extensions. My position as usual is to help those who don't
> >> really know php.
>
> > As Dominique correctly points out, this has nothing to do with PHP.
> > These are defined by the CGI protocol and come from the apache server
> > (which is why PHP calls its variable $_SERVER).
>
> Is there a need for a {(server ...)} markup expression?
I don't see a need for a {(server ...)} markup expression, which is
why the core doesn't include it. :-) I was simply remarking that
if a recipe was going to provide one, it would be better to use
the HTTP protocol names instead of introducing aliases.
I totally agree that page variables would be more appropriate
and consistent.
> Or are the markup expressions made available a backdoor to introduce
> pure PHP, and Apache, terminology? A geek's powertool box in other
> words, only for the initiated?
While some may be using it that way, that certainly isn't
my intent. However, it's also important to remember that
any sort of expression evaluator we provide will inherently
have a bit of a programming slant to it -- it's just part of
what we mean when we use words like "evaluate", "calculate",
and "expression".
Pm
_______________________________________________
pmwiki-users mailing list
pmwiki-users@pmichaud.com
http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
