Should we document this?
<include list "^Icicles_-">
Sorry, I don’t understand what the question/problem/use case is.
Is this about using
<include list "^AlexSchroeder"> on a wiki page to display a list of links such as you show above? What is the use case for that?
– DrewAdams 2013-02-03 02:18 UTC
The use case: depending on how you named pages, this generates a table of contents for a set of pages such that you don’t have to manually maintain an index to all the pages belonging to a collection. But there are drawbacks: the pages them selves are not automatically linked to a structure (no next, previous, contents); the page titles are listed without annotation (“this page explains how to do foo…”). – Alex
OK, I understand now. I see no problem with it, but I’m not sure how useful it will be. Someone wanting such a list dynamically can use search to get it, no? If there is no problem adding it, why not? Maybe someone will put it to good use.
One use-case of the top of my head - “orphan pages” – pages that have no in-bound links. Manually creating a page linking to orphaned pages removes them from that category. An auto-generated list of such pages does not.
Second use-case is squirrelly searches. It takes a long time to figure out initially, but can be saved for future ease, and for others. I mean – that’s why we have links in the first place. Because while it is completely possible to search for data in other pages, it’s a lot easier to link to what you want NOW.
– MichaelPaulukonis 2013-05-31 18:55 UTC
TextFormattingRules#new - alternate-row highlighting (Alternate contributions (alternate [new]’s) are shaded,) does not appear to be active (with the new CSS?).
Same goes for Putting [new::] will insert your UserName, and adds a timestamp to your contribution when you save the page. The timestamp appears when you move the mouse over the contribution.
the mouse over sounds like a CSS/JS thing, which has little to do with markup, and everything to do with one particular form of presentation, which might change. Plus, I’m not seeing the timestamp rendered to the HTML in any format, as of today.
Except for here in the talk section, where it is not a mouse-over effect.
– MichaelPaulukonis 2013-04-30 13:15 UTC
Yes, obviously the text needs to be changed.
As for the timestamp, it’s still there:
<div class="color one level0"><div class="portrait"><p><a class="newauthor" title="2013-04-30 09:34 UTC" href="http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs-en/AlexSchroeder"><img class="portrait" src="http://alexschroeder.ch/pics/alex-drinking-coffee-48-bw.jpg" alt="new: 2013-04-30 09:34 UTC" /></a> <br /> <a class="local" href="http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs-en/AlexSchroeder">AlexSchroeder</a></p></div> and it still renders as a tool-tip when I hover over the image with the mouse.
– AlexSchroeder 2013-04-30 13:25 UTC
Shouldn’t official documentation be included here? Or certainly have more prominence. I’m surprised to find an offsite-link buried in a sub-section.
– MichaelPaulukonis 2013-04-30 12:59 UTC
Well, I guess we could just copy the documentation over, possibly rewrite it. But what purpose would it serve? Who will maintain the documentation here if features change? As for it being buried in a subsection, I guess it’s a question of priorities: which information do you need to learn right away? Which information is most likely to be be useful and remain so for a long time? And which information is tricky, for the advanced users, for the rare use cases? Is there anything in particular you were looking for which you missed when you looked for it here? If so, do you think many people will want to use it? If so, let’s copy it over. If you found something here that was wrong or incomplete, however, the decision to make is different: is it something many people will want to use? Let’s fix it. Is it something that rarely comes up? Perhaps we’re better off just deleting it and referring people to the “official” documentation (which might itself be in need of improvements, unfortunately).
– AlexSchroeder 2013-04-30 13:30 UTC
I’ve been using the emacswiki on-and-off for… 5 years? I never noticed the link to external documentation until today. Promoting those links would help.
However, once I go there, there’s a jarring visual difference.
Plus, if somebody needs to edit the docs, they… can’t on the external site? Or they’ll have to have author-priviledges and pages on two sites.
I use PmWiki a lot. Each install ships with the documentation for that version. That way all docs are local, can be transcluded, modified, extended, etc. Yes, there is an issue with newer docs for newer versions on the host trickling down to upgraded installs, although it’s never really been a problem. It seems the current method may not have been a problem for anybody but me…..
So…. the hover-effect has nothing to do with the name, and everything to do with the pictures? I’m not seeing any hover-effect here with the names. I’m using Aurora 22.02a on Win7.
Also, the timestamps are still not appearing for me in rendered output (in pages; they’re appearing automatically in comments). From from NodeJs:
[new:OtherMichael:2013-04-28 19:59 UTC]Question: But does it still work with newer versions of node.js ?
<div class="color one level0"><p>Question: But does it still work with newer versions of node.js ?</p></div>
– MichaelPaulukonis 2013-04-30 14:54 UTC
Is it possible to have an inlined-image, from an external source, link to something?
So that the image is rendered, and it functions as a link?
If this exists, I couldn’t find the formatting
– MichaelPaulukonis 2013-05-20 17:16 UTC
[[image:<image URL>|alt text|<link URL>]].
Is there a convention for the formatting of keyboard shortcuts and elisp function names? For example how would one mark up M-x ediff-regions-wordwise ?
– jasonblewis 2013-05-31 02:11 UTC
`...'. E.g., Here’s an example of using the
‘M-x’ key to execute command
You can also show code snippets by indenting them (space chars before each line) or wrapping the set of lines with
– DrewAdams 2013-05-31 02:50 UTC