https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12796





--- Comment #10 from Simon Kågedal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  2008-11-28 09:30:31 UTC 
---
I voted on this because I think the functionality is badly needed, i.e. to
unclutter Wiki-text and it would also be good to be able to decide on reference
ordering. I think the proposed syntax looks a bit strange, though; agree with
the first comment from Maury Markowitz. I suggest something like this:

Apples are often red<ref name="bob"/>, but they can also be green<ref
name="alice"/>. Some people claim to have seen blue apples<ref
name="cybil">Cybil, C. (2004). Blue apples!</ref>

== References ==
<references>
<refdef name="alice">Alice, A. (1997). Green apples!</refdef>
<refdef name="bob">Bob, B. (2003). Red apples!</refdef>
</references> 

----
The "cybil" example is there to demonstrate how this would handle existing
code. When the "references" section is parsed, it goes through all "refdef"
tags. At the closing tag, it will display all refs that have been defined
earlier in the text, but do not have a "refdef". Actually, since mostly
"refdef"-tags are going to be inside "reference", the syntax could be
simplified:

<references>
alice = Alice, A. (1997). Green apples! |
bob = Bob, B. (2003). Red apples!
</references>

But the we lose some flexibility, like the things that "ref head" could
enable...


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to