What I am proposing is to modify the two generator templates, to produce
the following results. All documentation is shown as it should appear on
the relevant page, without any of the wiki markup (doubtless
fantastically complex) needed to produce it. (I may need to use a lot of
"&something;" H
ccornell - OpenOffice.org wrote:
OK, done, but I added the link by hand, instead of just adding the
template to the new page. The license template(s) add the page to the
category. Doing that to a category page, IIRC, is a wiki no-no.
The one thing you need to try and avoid is loops... a templ
OK, done, but I added the link by hand, instead of just adding the
template to the new page. The license template(s) add the page to the
category. Doing that to a category page, IIRC, is a wiki no-no.
The one thing you need to try and avoid is loops... a template referring
to itself for examp
T. J. Frazier wrote:
Clayton wrote:
T. J. Frazier wrote:
* What's with the redlink category, "PDL License"? (Strange things all
over.)
The red link on any category just means that someone has not yet added a
description to that category. In this case, the PDL License category
probably sh
Clayton wrote:
This looks like it will have to remain scrambled for a little while.
The fix is to run the rebuildall.php script from the command line.. but
I can't do that right now since the php that we have installed on the
Solaris10u6 machine hosting the Wiki has some weird problem... it
segf
>> * While researching the above, I ran into the Category for the Basic
>> Guide. The alphabetizing in that is peculiar, to say the least. If
>> that's a matter of fixing the refs – [category whatever] – I'll be glad
>> to track those down and fix them. If the pages themselves should be
>> renamed,
Clayton wrote:
T. J. Frazier wrote:
* What's with the redlink category, "PDL License"? (Strange things all
over.)
The red link on any category just means that someone has not yet added a
description to that category. In this case, the PDL License category
probably should have something li
T. J. Frazier wrote:
> * Am I going blind, or is there not a word in the Basic Guide about the
> Basic IDE? If it's really missing, I propose to add a short, new first
> page to the Guide, about the IDE, and a reference to the Dialog Editor.
> The only substantive information I propose is "how you
