https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16330
Rupert Millard <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #6 from Rupert Millard <[email protected]> 2008-12-31 16:17:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > > Clearly if the Cite extension is not meant to support nesting <refs>, the > > regexp on Cite_body.php needs to be improved to resist the #tag magic word, > > and > > bug 15712 needs to be fixed. > > Patches are welcome. Agreed. Apologies if I came across unhelpful or hypercritical. (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Clearly if the Cite extension is not meant to support nesting <refs>, the > > regexp on Cite_body.php needs to be improved to resist the #tag magic word, > > IMO, this would be very bad. When an article has explanatory footnotes, it > often is the case that the explanatory footnote will need a citation. If you > disable #tag, we're back to the crap we had do to work around the lack of > functionality before #tag and the group parameter were created. Agreed - I'm not going to go down this line. My point was that at the moment it's not designed to allow nested refs > (In reply to comment #4) > > My understanding is that *no* XML-style parser functions can be nested. > > <poem>Foo<poem>bar</poem>baz</poem> doesn't work either. Nor <source>, > > etc. > > As far as I can tell, the parser doesn't even try. When it sees an extension > tag, it just grabs text up to the next matching closing tag and passes it off > to the hook function. That is also my understanding. -- 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 on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
