Thanks Tones I have been thinking of a way to incorporate this transclusion
with templates along the lines of the example given where a line of text is
run through at template: `{{Transclusion||$:/core/ui/TagTemplate}}` . I
have found a work around but I would rather use something like this which
doesn't necessarily effect the entire tiddler.
On Wednesday, September 30, 2020 at 8:10:15 PM UTC-4 TW Tones wrote:
> 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/b199107d-9807-4616-96eb-0cdd4fca1a91n%40googlegroups.com.
