23 Jul
2008
23 Jul
'08
6:05 p.m.
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
3) Do we want to support images in links. For example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax for
tables.
Thanks
-Vincent
24 Jul
24 Jul
11:46 a.m.
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could do
Does not seems very natural as text escaping, why not ""some tex"" ?
it with a macro but I don't know how we could
implement it easily...
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
+1
3) Do we want to support images in links. For
example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
Sounds like a good idea to me. +1 if it's not too much work.
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to
support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax for
tables.
+1 for a wiki syntax.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
11:56 a.m.
On Jul 24, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
The only downside is that the more changes we add the more difficult
it'll be for users to migrate their content. We can probably write
some migration scripts for moving links [...] to [[....]], same for
bold, etc. Might be harder to tables.
Personally I'm a bit -0 for a wiki syntax but I'm not sure.
Thanks
-Vincent
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
rationale: creole does it like this.
http://www.wikicreole.org/wiki/Creole1.0#section-Creole1.0-NowikiPreformatt…
In your proposition above I can't see if you're writing single quotes,
double quotes or a mixtures, sounds an issue :)
Anyway so it means you think we need a syntax too right?
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could
do
Does not seems very natural as text escaping, why not ""some tex"" ?
it with a
macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy
to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
+1
3) Do we want to support images in links. For
example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
Sounds like a good idea to me. +1 if it's not too much work.
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to
support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do
we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax for
tables.
+1 for a wiki syntax.
12:08 p.m.
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
The only downside is that the more changes we add the more difficult
it'll be for users to migrate their content. We can probably write
some migration scripts for moving links [...] to [[....]], same for
bold, etc. Might be harder to tables.
Personally I'm a bit -0 for a wiki syntax but I'm not sure.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Jul 24, 2008, at 11:46 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
I did not though of multiline, in this context yes "" don't show if
it's opened or closed so it's not a good idea.
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
rationale: creole does it like this.
http://www.wikicreole.org/wiki/Creole1.0#section-Creole1.0-NowikiPreformatt… Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could
do
Does not seems very natural as text escaping, why not ""some tex"" ?
In your proposition above I can't see if you're writing single quotes,
double quotes or a mixtures, sounds an issue :)
Anyway so it means you think we need a syntax too right?
Yes definitely.
it with a
macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy
to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
+1
3) Do we want to support images in links. For
example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
Sounds like a good idea to me. +1 if it's not too much work.
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to
support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do
we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax for
tables.
+1 for a wiki syntax. 
25 Jul
25 Jul
11:38 a.m.
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
+1 to use Creole syntax for this, I prefer this to mediawiki syntax
(<nowiki>, which looks like html).
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple
ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
+1 to use 2 symbols for everything with 2 exceptions : lists and tables.
3) Do we want to support images in links. For
example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
Being able to have images as links is a common request, +1 to handle it.
-0 to be able to have text + image in a link.
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a
wiki syntax for
tables.
Creole syntax for this (pipes only) looks both user friendly and not
error prone. Since table lines have to start with a pipe this syntax
does not prevent from using pipes in text.
--
Jean-Vincent Drean
1:27 p.m.
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
propose using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence).
We could do it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement
it easily...
I was wrong it's quite easy to do if we want:
* We already have an EscapeBlock that accepts a string
* We already have an onEscape(String escapedString) event in the
Listener
So all we need for a {nowiki} macro will be to generate an EscapeBlock.
Thus I'm no longer sure I prefer to use {{{text}}} over {nowiki}.
WDYT?
[snip]
Thanks
-Vincent
5:59 p.m.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Or {{text}} for the consistent "double chars for items".
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
propose using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence).
We could do it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement
it easily...
I was wrong it's quite easy to do if we want:
* We already have an EscapeBlock that accepts a string
* We already have an onEscape(String escapedString) event in the
Listener
So all we need for a {nowiki} macro will be to generate an EscapeBlock.
Thus I'm no longer sure I prefer to use {{{text}}} over {nowiki}.
WDYT?
[snip]
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
6:02 p.m.
On Jul 25, 2008, at 5:59 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
We can't do that...
{{ is going to be used for macros...
-Vincent
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Or {{text}} for the consistent "double chars for items". Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
propose using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence).
We could do it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement
it easily...
I was wrong it's quite easy to do if we want:
* We already have an EscapeBlock that accepts a string
* We already have an onEscape(String escapedString) event in the
Listener
So all we need for a {nowiki} macro will be to generate an
EscapeBlock.
Thus I'm no longer sure I prefer to use {{{text}}} over {nowiki}.
6:26 p.m.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:02 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 5:59 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
Sorry forgot it
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
We can't do that...
{{ is going to be used for macros...
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Or {{text}} for the consistent "double chars for items". Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
propose using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence).
We could do it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement
it easily...
I was wrong it's quite easy to do if we want:
* We already have an EscapeBlock that accepts a string
* We already have an onEscape(String escapedString) event in the
Listener
So all we need for a {nowiki} macro will be to generate an
EscapeBlock.
Thus I'm no longer sure I prefer to use {{{text}}} over {nowiki}.
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
27 Jul
27 Jul
7:18 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY)
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right now
I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need this at
the wiki syntax level?
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple
ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
We all agreed on double braces. It's now done in wikimodel and in XWiki.
3) Do we want to support images in links. For
example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
Not finalized (need more input).
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a
wiki syntax for
tables.
Also need more input.
Thanks
-Vincent
18 Aug
18 Aug
10:38 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY)
On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to have
more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki syntax.
Thanks
-Vincent
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll create
an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in agreement.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
[snip]
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could
do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right now
I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need this at
the wiki syntax level? 4) Tables: do
we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax for
tables.
Also need more input. 
11:02 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY)
[snap]
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to have
more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki syntax.
I'm also in favor of keeping a macro for tables. It's less elegant than a
wiki syntax such as Confluence's :
Header || Header || Header
Item | Item | Item
but it provides for more flexibility, and being able to add the parameters
to turn a classic table into a sortable / filterable one would be good.
I have a couple questions about this though : using a wiki macro, how could
one specify which headers should be filtered and which ones shouldn't for
instance ? In HTML code those settings are set at the <th> level, but in a
XWiki macro parameters have to be passed between { & } if I understand
well... What's the solution to this ?
Guillaume
4)
Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax for
tables.
Also need more input.
27 Aug
27 Aug
5:23 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki
syntax.
I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's done
for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables in
the following manner:
* Parameters at the table level:
{{tableParam=value ...}}
|| column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the column level:
|| {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the line level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
* Parameters at the cell level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since {{ }} are
already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
something like %% I guess.
So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables instead of
a macro.
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll
create an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in agreement.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
[snip]
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We
could do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right now
I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need this at
the wiki syntax level? 4)
Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax
for
tables.
Also need more input.
28 Aug
28 Aug
9:37 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
This syntax looks good to me, I like the very simple syntax as a
default where we can add details when needed.
On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki
syntax.
I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's done
for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables in
the following manner:
* Parameters at the table level:
{{tableParam=value ...}}
|| column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the column level:
|| {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the line level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
* Parameters at the cell level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since {{ }} are
already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
something like %% I guess.
So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables instead of
a macro.
WDYT?
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll
create an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in agreement.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
[snip]
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We
could do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right now
I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need this at
the wiki syntax level? 4)
Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax
for
tables.
Also need more input.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
10:21 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
I never use the table macro because I can't design tables in which headers
are not columns but headers are rows!
Moreover, if you need tables in which one cell has "rowspan" or
"colspan",
the macro is not usable...
With your syntax, will it be possible to do this?
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
This syntax looks good to me, I like the very simple syntax as a
default where we can add details when needed.
On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's done
for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables in
the following manner:
* Parameters at the table level:
{{tableParam=value ...}}
|| column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the column level:
|| {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the line level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
* Parameters at the cell level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since {{ }} are
already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
something like %% I guess.
So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables instead of
a macro.
WDYT?
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
> Some open issues/questions:
>
> 1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
> propose
> using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We
> could do
> it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right now
I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need this at
the wiki syntax level?
I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll
create an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in agreement.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
[snip]
> 4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do
we want a wiki syntax
> for
> tables.
Also need more input.
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki
syntax.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
11:14 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
Hi,
Both approaches (macro & wiki syntax) have their advantages & shortcomings.
However, I don't think that's the most important issue right here. To sum
things up, I think the issue devs are having most of the time is that
they're trying to do complex stuff (layout-related or feature-related, for
the filterable / sortable table for instance).
To do so they cannot use the wiki syntax / table macro right now since it's
not powerful enough. However, they still want to use the standard XWiki
table layout (with the usual colors & borders).
So we've got 2 choices : design a wiki implementation of html tables that's
powerful enough to accomodate all the options offered by standard html or
keep simple wiki tables and make it easy for developers to mimic them using
the right class names in their html code.
Mimicking html syntax for classes in XWiki 2.0 syntax :
- Pros : Lots of options available from the syntax, can be edited from
the WYSWIYG editor
- Cons : loses the simplicity of wiki markup, harder to implement right,
new code to learn, clunky interface in the WYSIWYG editor
Making it easy to have HTML tables look like wiki tables :
- Pros : No need to learn a new syntax for developers, easier to
implement, possibly cleaner
- Cons : Need to use the {{xhtml}} macro all the time, cannot be edited
in the WYSIWYG, need to know the name of XWiki classes to use for tables
My take would be that for standard users using a wiki syntax for tables is
easier than a table macro :
Header || Header || Header
Header || item | item
Header || item | item
item | item
item | item
but that we should not try to go too far with that syntax (as Pascal pointed
out, a dev will want the full html table implementation anyway) and rather
try to provide a simple class name that would let devs use the standard
XWiki table CSS rules when they need them.
Sure, this would mean using the wiki editor to do complex table stuff... But
developers are already using it so it doesn't matter much. For standard
user, being able to create a table and choose headers / borders is probably
good enough, at least for now since we're looking for increased stability &
simplicity in the editor.
Guillaume
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Pascal Voitot <pascal.voitot.dev(a)gmail.com
This syntax looks good to me, I like the very simple syntax as a
default where we can add details when needed.
--
Guillaume Lerouge
Product Manager - XWiki
Skype ID : wikibc
http://blog.xwiki.com/
wrote:
I never use the table macro because I can't design
tables in which headers
are not columns but headers are rows!
Moreover, if you need tables in which one cell has "rowspan" or
"colspan",
the macro is not usable...
With your syntax, will it be possible to do this?
[snip]
>> 4)
Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax
>> for
>> tables.
>
> Also need more input.
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki
syntax.
I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's done
for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables in
the following manner:
* Parameters at the table level:
{{tableParam=value ...}}
|| column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the column level:
|| {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the line level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
* Parameters at the cell level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since {{ }} are
already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
something like %% I guess.
So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables instead of
a macro.
WDYT?
11:24 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
Hi Pascal,
On Aug 28, 2008, at 10:21 AM, Pascal Voitot wrote:
I never use the table macro because I can't design
tables in which
headers
are not columns but headers are rows!
This will work.
Moreover, if you need tables in which one cell has
"rowspan" or
"colspan",
the macro is not usable...
This will work too.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/wiki/WikiSyntaxCommon (this is
not the xwiki syntax but the idea is to have the same support for
tables).
Thanks
-Vincent
With your syntax, will it be possible to do this?
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Some open issues/questions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
>>>>> propose
>>>>> using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We
>>>>> could do
>>>>> it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it
>>>>> easily...
>>>>
>>>> Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right
>>>> now
>>>> I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need
>>>> this at
>>>> the wiki syntax level?
>>>
>>> I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll
>>> create an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in
>>> agreement.
>>> See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
>>>
>>> I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>> 4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki syntax
>>>>> for
>>>>> tables.
>>>>
>>>> Also need more input.
>>>
>>> My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
>>> have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki
>>> syntax.
>>
>> I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's
>> done
>> for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables in
>> the following manner:
>>
>> * Parameters at the table level:
>>
>> {{tableParam=value ...}}
>> || column 1 || column 2
>> cell 1 | cell 2
>>
>> * Parameters at the column level:
>>
>> || {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
>> cell 1 | cell 2
>>
>> * Parameters at the line level:
>>
>> || column 1 || column 2
>> {{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
>>
>> * Parameters at the cell level:
>>
>> || column 1 || column 2
>> {{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
>>
>> He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
>>
>> Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since {{ }}
>> are
>> already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
>> something like %% I guess.
>>
>> So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables
>> instead of
>> a macro.
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> This syntax looks good to me, I like the very simple syntax as a
> default where we can add details when needed.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
11:25 a.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
On Aug 28, 2008, at 11:24 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi Pascal,
On Aug 28, 2008, at 10:21 AM, Pascal Voitot wrote:
Only thing to verify is how to have a table with no headers... Since
if we don't have them I don't know how wikimodel will recognize it's a
table. I'll ask.
Thanks
-Vincent
I never use the table macro because I can't
design tables in which
headers
are not columns but headers are rows!
This will work. Moreover, if you need tables in which one cell
has "rowspan" or
"colspan",
the macro is not usable...
This will work too.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/wiki/WikiSyntaxCommon (this
is not the xwiki syntax but the idea is to have the same support for
tables).
Thanks
-Vincent
> With your syntax, will it be possible to do this?
>
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Thomas Mortagne
> <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Some open issues/questions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text.
I'd
>>>>>> propose
>>>>>> using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We
>>>>>> could do
>>>>>> it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it
>>>>>> easily...
>>>>>
>>>>> Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation.
>>>>> Right now
>>>>> I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need
>>>>> this at
>>>>> the wiki syntax level?
>>>>
>>>> I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll
>>>> create an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in
>>>> agreement.
>>>> See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
>>>>
>>>> I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>>> 4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a wiki
>>>>>> syntax
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> tables.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also need more input.
>>>>
>>>> My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
>>>> have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a
>>>> wiki
>>>> syntax.
>>>
>>> I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's
>>> done
>>> for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables
>>> in
>>> the following manner:
>>>
>>> * Parameters at the table level:
>>>
>>> {{tableParam=value ...}}
>>> || column 1 || column 2
>>> cell 1 | cell 2
>>>
>>> * Parameters at the column level:
>>>
>>> || {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
>>> cell 1 | cell 2
>>>
>>> * Parameters at the line level:
>>>
>>> || column 1 || column 2
>>> {{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
>>>
>>> * Parameters at the cell level:
>>>
>>> || column 1 || column 2
>>> {{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
>>>
>>> He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
>>>
>>> Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since
>>> {{ }} are
>>> already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
>>> something like %% I guess.
>>>
>>> So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables
>>> instead of
>>> a macro.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>
>> This syntax looks good to me, I like the very simple syntax as a
>> default where we can add details when needed.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
2 Sep
2 Sep
2:15 p.m.
New subject: [xwiki-devs] [Rendering] Table syntax vs Table macro (was Re: Open questions for the XWiki syntax v2.0 (SUMMARY))
On Aug 28, 2008, at 9:37 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
This is now implemented but with a small difference: parameters are
specified using (%...%)
This makes it more readable and easier to parse (different begin and
end tokens).
Now "all" that is left is for Thomas to add support for tables in the
XWiki renderers ;)
Thanks
-Vincent
On Aug 18, 2008, at 10:38 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
This syntax looks good to me, I like the very simple syntax as a
default where we can add details when needed.
On Jul 27, 2008, at 7:18 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
I was wrong. I've talked to Mikhail from wikimodel and what he's done
for the wikimodel common syntax is to allow parameters for tables in
the following manner:
* Parameters at the table level:
{{tableParam=value ...}}
|| column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the column level:
|| {{columnParam=value ...}} column 1 || column 2
cell 1 | cell 2
* Parameters at the line level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{lineParam=value ...}} | Cell 1 | Cell 2
* Parameters at the cell level:
|| column 1 || column 2
{{cellParam=value...}} cell 1 | cell 2
He says it's easy to do the same for the XWiki Parser in wikimodel.
Of course we'll need to change the parameter delimiter since {{ }}
are
already used for macros for the xwiki syntax. But we could use
something like %% I guess.
So I'm now more in favor of having a wiki syntax for tables instead
of
a macro.
WDYT?
On Jul 23, 2008, at 6:05 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
> Some open issues/questions:
>
> 1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd
> propose
> using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We
> could do
> it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it
> easily...
Still not sure. Most said they liked the {{{ }}} notation. Right
now
I've implemented the {{nowiki}} macro. Do we still want/need this
at
the wiki syntax level?
I think we do since it'll easier to type than {{nowiki}}. I'll
create an issue in wikimodel to add it since we were all in
agreement.
See http://code.google.com/p/wikimodel/issues/detail?id=38
I guess I'll just remove the nowiki macro when it's done.
[snip]
> 4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do
we want a wiki syntax
> for
> tables.
Also need more input.
My take is that we should go with a macro since this allows us to
have more options like filterable/sortable/pageable/etc than a wiki
syntax. 
28 Jul
28 Jul
1:43 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
Some open issues/questions:
1) I think we need a syntax for escaping a block of text. I'd propose
using {{{whatever here}}} (same as creole and confluence). We could do
it with a macro but I don't know how we could implement it easily...
2) Do we want double curly braces for macros or simple ones:
{{macro/}} or {macro/}. If we use simple ones then it won't be easy to
enter { and } chars in a text (they would need to be escaped) and
since we've decided to have double chars for items ( **, --, ~~, etc)
we might as well do that for macros.
+1 for {{ }}
3) Do we want to support images in links. For example:
[[image:someimage.png]]? We already support URIs in links, such as
mailto: so maybe it wouldn't be too hard to support images too I
guess. Or do we want only the Image macro? A related question is do we
support http images (http://.../someimage.png) inside links and as an
inline element directly in the text?
+1 for supporting images in links..
4) Tables: do we keep the table macro or do we want a
wiki syntax for
tables.
I'm fine with any approach
Ludovic
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Ludovic Dubost
Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/
XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com
Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost
5850
days inactive
5891
days old
19 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Guillaume Lerouge -
Jean-Vincent Drean -
Ludovic Dubost -
Pascal Voitot -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol