Patrick R. Michaud schrieb: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 04:39:50PM +0000, Ed W wrote: > >> Hi, I am looking through the code in stdmarkup.php, in particular the >> Cells function and wondering why we don't offer (automatic) nested >> tables/divs, etc? >> > > The reason PmWiki works the way it does is that I didn't want > to require (:...end:) tags on every construct, especially for > non-nested constructs. For example, if we had automatically nested > tables/divs, then what is now > > (:div:) > first division > (:div:) > second division > (:div:) > third division > (:divend:) > > would end up being > > (:div:) > first division > (:divend:) > (:div:) > second division > (:divend:) > (:div:) > third division > (:divend:) > > It gets even worse for things like nested (:if:) constructs > and the like: > > (:if ... :) > (:if2 ... :) > (:if2 ... :) > (:if ... :) > (:if2 ... :) > (:ifend:) > > becomes > > (:if ... :) > (:if ... :) > (:ifend:) > (:if ... :) > (:ifend:) > (:ifend:) > (:if ... :) > (:if ... :) > (:ifend:) > (:ifend:) > > Since the non-nested cases are far more common than the nested ones, > I've optimized the markup for that. > > >> This doesn't seem to change or break anything obvious. We could nest >> divs before, now we can just do it without having to manually number them. >> > > Changing this in the core would break a _lot_ of stuff, as evidenced > by the examples above. > > Pm > Way not just make it configurable? In my case for example it's far more hassle to keep control over the numbering cause I work a lot with includes and sections.
> _______________________________________________ > pmwiki-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users > > _______________________________________________ pmwiki-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
