19 Feb
2009
19 Feb
'09
4:52 p.m.
Dan Miron wrote:
Vincent Massol wrote:
Not necessarily. You can search for all files with the base name equal
to the one given as an argument, and any (or a set of possible) extension.
On Feb 18, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Dan Miron wrote:
I could go on with {{icon name="arrow_out"//}} but this means that the
extension will be assumed as ".gif" but it offers the advantage that
it's quite intuitive. Hi,
Regarding the http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-2964 issue, this
is how I see it:
- Grabbing the icons from the silk iconset
- Creating a macro called 'icon' with the following parameters:
- fileName (required) the name of the file which holds the
I don't like that parameter name. I prefer the more anonymous
"name"
icon; here I see two possible approaches:
- with (optional)
- height (optional)
I don't think we should specify width and height since we're using
bitmaps. Would be nice to use SVG for sure but 1) the silk icon set is
not SVG and 2) I don't think ie6 supports SVG out of the box.
An example of usage would be the following:
{{icon fileName="arrow_out.gif" with="20" height="20" /}}
I'd prefer:
{{icon name="arrow_out"//}}
Now for easy emoticons usage I think (I'm not sure) that we could use
a Rendering Transformation instead that would recognize special
characters (such as :) ) and internally transform them into icon macros.
However there's a use case I haven't thought about which is that the
xwiki syntax renderer should probably not use transformed XDOM to
generate wiki syntax since otherwise that makes Transformations
persistent. Then there's the question of the WYSIWYG editor... Need to
think some more about this...
At least you could start implementing the icon macro before we agree
on the emoticon part.
On the other hand, this is what Anca says:
-------------------------
Would it be any difference between this macro and the image markup
([[image:reference]] or image:reference), besides the way the image file
resolution (image: looks it up as an attachment whereas the {{icon}} macro would
getit from the silk icon set) ?
Any way we could make these icons accessible as image: references instead of
building a whole new macro for it, for syntax simplicity?
-------------------------
So what do you think? Should I go ahead with what I proposed above? I'd
say yes, because it's more intuitive than using image:reference.
I'd go with a new macro. They have different meanings and usage
scenarios, since the image macro is supposed to display user
attachments, while the icon is supposed to display platform images. The
way I see it, {{icon}} should not always use silk icons, but:
- we should establish a set of core icons (names) that should always be
available, an abstract icon set that XWiki supports
- we should provide a default "implementation" for it, using the silk icons
- we should (in the future) allow to plug in and choose different icon
sets (for each skin, for each user, for each space, etc.)
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/