Donald,
If you look inside $:/core/templates/static.template.html you can see how
the template currently does it in two ways in fact for styles;
<div id="styleArea">
{{$:/boot/boot.css||$:/core/templates/css-tiddler}}
</div>
<style type="text/css">
{{$:/core/ui/PageStylesheet||$:/core/templates/wikified-tiddler}}
</style>
Notice how its setting $:/boot/boot.css and $:/core/ui/PageStylesheet as
the current tiddler and transclude a template?
In fact if you look inside $:/core/templates/css-tiddler you will see the
style tags in there, of note is this tiddler is unusually formatted
There should be a simple way to do this. If the style or script tags are
specific to a particular page ie tiddler we could make use of a field in
the tiddler to contain a transclusion of the style / scripts that the
template subsequently includes in the template, you can then choose which
page has which scripts.
I do not have the time right now, but such a solution would possibly be
reusable and helpful to others.
Regards
Tony
On Thursday, 1 October 2020 01:29:29 UTC+10, Donald Coates wrote:
>
> It is possible to have a tiddler with a <script> block as its contents and
> transclude this into the templates/static.tiddler.html so that for example
> I have code necessary for the comments section on each page rendered by
> that template.
>
> However I cannot have an <script> block within a tiddler that is to be
> rendered through that template, for example the one time, in document code
> necessary to embed a github gist that shows a block of code I am talking
> about, because it gets mangled into an unusable form in the process of
> being rendered. It seems like no matter how I try and put that <script>
> code into the tiddler, be it by macro or transclusion, it still gets
> 'neutered' in the rendering process. This is what I would like to change.
>
> On Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 12:20:38 AM UTC-4 TW Tones wrote:
>
>> Donald,
>>
>> I personally see no reason why not. TiddlyWiki itself uses raw system
>> tags
>> <https://tiddlywiki.com/#SystemTag%3A%20%24%3A%2Ftags%2FRawStaticContent>
>> for
>> a similar purpose. Includes insertion head/body etc... Which you could
>> clone for scrips and styles.
>>
>> You will need to modify the static tiddler template to accommodate it,
>> and you can transclude this content from another tiddler.
>>
>> However a longer lasting and sharable solution would be to provide a
>> mechaisium within the static template, to accept this (and other values)
>> from the source tiddler
>> eg a static-script field in source tiddlers could contain what is to be
>> added between the script tags or a transclusion of a tiddler) thus the
>> author can decide on a per-tiddler basis which static pages get custom
>> scripts or styles.
>>
>> This would further support the use of Tiddlywiki as a site generator.
>>
>> Regards
>> TW Tones.
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, 30 September 2020 11:32:28 UTC+10, Donald Coates wrote:
>>>
>>> Is it possible to have <script> tags and allow them to be rendered in a
>>> static page? I understand the security issues for inside a tiddler, but
>>> when rendered as an html page it would be useful.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c2796b47-72ee-4baa-837e-8c20a414c8dco%40googlegroups.com.
