I don't agree that it should be fully automated by any stretch of the
imagination.  I can see that it is an option that some may wish to use, but
I dislike the limitations, and do not see it working as the only means to
use.

Regards, Billinghurst


On Fri, 7 Jun 2013 08:52:12 +0200, Andrea Zanni <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:36 AM, David Cuenca <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Automatic creation of page transclusion is nice but also dangerous...
too
>> many structures to have an easy solution.
> 
> 
> What Alex is thinking, if I understand his work correctly, is that when
you
> work on a new book in nsPage,
> you "define" what the structure is (his work right now is wrapping
> titles/chapters in {{title}} templates, to give the book a logic
> structure), and then a bot runs, create corrispondent ns0 chapters and
> transclude pages.
> 
> I think that ns0 automation is something long needed, as we could
suggest
> users to focus just on nsPage and Indexes. All the difficult
transclusion
> part would be automatic (or semi-automatic).
> 
> I wonder if there is a better way to define the logic structure of our
> book, maybe directly in the Index page.
> I don't know what would be easier for the user:
> * define the table of content once for all in the Index page
> * define the table of content once in the book Toc (there is often one,
if
> not always, when needed)
> * define the table of content just putting templates thorough the book,
as
> the reader goes through the book.
> 
> What do you all think?
> 
> Aubrey

_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l

Reply via email to