Thanks for the clarification, I didn't know tracks supported that. I added a note to the ticket that this works using textile notation in case anyone has the same question in the future. -james
On 3/21/07, bsag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue Mar 20 14:17:37 UTC 2007, James Kebinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Its early in the day and my brain isn't in gear yet, so I'm not sure I > understand what you're proposing - is it that Tracks do nothing to auto-link > strings that look like urls because its not that hard to do the html markup > oneself? (if you know html) No, I didn't mean mark it up with HTML, but with Textile "link":http://google.com I don't think that's too hard, and as I said, you get a much neater note. cheers, bsag > > On 3/20/07, bsag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 20 Mar 2007, at 2:04, James Kebinger wrote: > > > > > I threw some amazon links into todo notes fields today and was > > > annoyed that they didn't become links - I see ticket281 has been > > > open for a while. Is there a consensus on enabling textile or > > > markdown syntax for notes fields vs finding and converting links > > > with a regex etc vs doing nothing? I'm willing to do the legwork to > > > get any of these options done if we can make a decision on which > > > one to go with. > > > > I'd actually rather manually mark up links with Textile or Markdown. > > It's a tiny manual overhead versus quite a lot of processing time. > > Links actually look much nicer if you mark them up because they're > > more compact, and you can give them a meaningful name (particularly > > useful for Amazon URLs which are otherwise not very human-readable. > > > > But I'm open to suggestions. I think doing it manually is very little > > work (I tend to mark them up without thinking) for a nicer result.
_______________________________________________ Tracks-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss
