16 Apr
2009
16 Apr
'09
3:56 p.m.
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
Thanks
-Vincent
16 Apr
16 Apr
4:33 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
But if macro specifies wiki=no, then all whitespaces should be interpreted HTML
style.
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
+1 for A)
+1 for B2), I think it's the only one with simple rules (the others are a bit
sophisticated with too many particular cases), and even if it's a big change, at
least it's easy to understand.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
4:39 p.m.
On Apr 16, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Anca Paula Luca wrote:
Vincent Massol wrote:
yes, this is only for when wiki=true.
[snip]
Thanks
-Vincent
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing
them
to the wiki syntax parser
But if macro specifies wiki=no, then all whitespaces should be
interpreted HTML
style. 
6 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
+1 for A and B2
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
6:04 p.m.
A) +1
B) +1 for 2)
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 15:56, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
6:07 p.m.
+1 for A and B2
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
11:49 p.m.
I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have all this
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
The stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line for it.
This sounds a good solution to me.
I don't really understand the issur with line breaks with the new line
starting with space.
For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \ at the end of the line
to remove the new line ?
So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
Vincent Massol a écrit :
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
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
17 Apr
17 Apr
12:01 a.m.
On Apr 16, 2009, at 11:49 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have all this
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
The stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line for
it.
This sounds a good solution to me.
B1 means that have to put velocity code on the same line if it goes on
the same line and we cannot align it on following lines (as shown in
the example below).
For ex:
hello #if (...)
...
#end
The following will generate an extra NL:
hello
#if (...)
...
#end
Right now we already have an important issue in velocity code that
make it awkward and generate lots of problems: the fact that code
cannot be spaced out and empty lines generate paragraphs. With B1 we
have the same problems but worse since NL are significants.
I don't really understand the issur with line
breaks with the new line
starting with space.
If you strip leading spaces you need a way to force a leading space
when you have a line break and want to have the second line with
leading spaces.
For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \ at the
end of the line
to remove the new line ?
\\ forces a line break so it's the opposite. You don't need \\ with B1
since NL are significant.
BTW if you want to see more exampleq, see
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3107?focusedCommentId=37707&pag…
Another example is:
hello #if (...)
...
#end #if (...)
...
meaning you have to make sure you put velocity commands one next to
the other or they'll be displayed on the next line.
Thanks
-Vincent
So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
Vincent Massol a écrit :
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing
them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be
able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the
same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining
between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter
new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
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
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
8:34 a.m.
On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:01 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Apr 16, 2009, at 11:49 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
>
> I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have all this
>
> some text $nl
> $sp next line
>
> #if (...)
> this goes on the same line
> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
> #end
>
> $nl $nl
> This a new paragraph
>
>
> Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
The problem is that this is scripting and some construct take several
lines for ex and you don't want to put everything on the same line
when you code so we definitely not want to display what is typed.
-Vincent
The stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line for
it.
This sounds a good solution to me.
B1 means that have to put velocity code on the same line if it goes
on the same line and we cannot align it on following lines (as shown
in the example below).
For ex:
hello #if (...)
...
#end
The following will generate an extra NL:
hello
#if (...)
...
#end
Right now we already have an important issue in velocity code that
make it awkward and generate lots of problems: the fact that code
cannot be spaced out and empty lines generate paragraphs. With B1 we
have the same problems but worse since NL are significants.
I don't really understand the issur with line
breaks with the new
line
starting with space.
If you strip leading spaces you need a way to force a leading space
when you have a line break and want to have the second line with
leading spaces.
For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \
at the end of the
line
to remove the new line ?
\\ forces a line break so it's the opposite. You don't need \\ with
B1 since NL are significant.
BTW if you want to see more exampleq, see
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3107?focusedCommentId=37707&pag…
Another example is:
hello #if (...)
...
#end #if (...)
...
meaning you have to make sure you put velocity commands one next to
the other or they'll be displayed on the next line.
Thanks
-Vincent
>
>
> So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
>
> I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
>
> Vincent Massol a écrit :
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
>> spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
>> If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
>> current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
>> meaningful.
>>
>> I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
>> people
>> voted on it (only Thomas did).
>>
>> A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
>> - strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
>> - strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing
>> them
>> to the wiki syntax parser
>>
>> B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
>>
>> 1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
>>
>> Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be
>> able
>> to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
>> escaping the leading space with ~(space).
>> Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
>> to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
>> split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This
>> is
>> the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
>> aerate the text with empty lines.
>>
>> Ex:
>>
>> some text
>> ~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
>> #end
>>
>> This is a new paragraph
>>
>> In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the
>> same
>> line since NL are significant.
>>
>> 2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
>>
>> This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining
>> between
>> "words" (same as HTML).
>> The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter
>> new
>> lines and spaces.
>> The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no
>> magic
>> anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
>> required).
>> Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
>> where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
>>
>> Ex:
>>
>> some text $nl
>> $sp next line
>>
>> #if (...)
>> this goes on the same line
>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>> #end
>>
>> $nl $nl
>> This a new paragraph
>>
>> Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
>> velocity #if to show that it would work.
>>
>> 3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow
>> "forced"
>> line breaks with "\\".
>>
>> The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
>> than 1 leave them.
>>
>> Ex:
>>
>> some text\\
>> ~ next line
>> #if (...)
>> this goes on the same line
>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>> #end
>>
>> This a new paragraph
>>
>> I'm +1 for A)
>>
>> For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
>> big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>> ______________
2:09 p.m.
Can't we make NL be removed only before velocity directives:
(\n\s+)#if
(\n\s+)#foreach
(\n\s+)#set
(\n\s+)#else
(\n\s+)#elseif
This would sound much better to me
Ludovic
Vincent Massol a écrit :
On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:01 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
_______________________________________________
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
On Apr 16, 2009, at 11:49 PM, Ludovic Dubost
wrote:
> I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have all this
>
> some text $nl
> $sp next line
>
> #if (...)
> this goes on the same line
> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
> #end
>
> $nl $nl
> This a new paragraph
>
>
> Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
>
The problem is that this is scripting and some construct take several
lines for ex and you don't want to put everything on the same line
when you code so we definitely not want to display what is typed.
-Vincent
The
stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line for
it.
This sounds a good solution to me.
B1 means that have to put velocity code on the same line if it goes
on the same line and we cannot align it on following lines (as shown
in the example below).
For ex:
hello #if (...)
...
#end
The following will generate an extra NL:
hello
#if (...)
...
#end
Right now we already have an important issue in velocity code that
make it awkward and generate lots of problems: the fact that code
cannot be spaced out and empty lines generate paragraphs. With B1 we
have the same problems but worse since NL are significants.
I don't really understand the issur with line
breaks with the new
line
starting with space.
If you strip leading spaces you need a way to force a leading space
when you have a line break and want to have the second line with
leading spaces.
For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \
at the end of the
line
to remove the new line ?
\\ forces a line break so it's the opposite. You don't need \\ with
B1 since NL are significant.
BTW if you want to see more exampleq, see
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3107?focusedCommentId=37707&pag…
Another example is:
hello #if (...)
...
#end #if (...)
...
meaning you have to make sure you put velocity commands one next to
the other or they'll be displayed on the next line.
Thanks
-Vincent
> So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
>
> I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
>
> Vincent Massol a écrit :
>
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
>> spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
>> If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
>> current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
>> meaningful.
>>
>> I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
>> people
>> voted on it (only Thomas did).
>>
>> A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
>> - strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
>> - strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing
>> them
>> to the wiki syntax parser
>>
>> B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
>>
>> 1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
>>
>> Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be
>> able
>> to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
>> escaping the leading space with ~(space).
>> Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
>> to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
>> split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This
>> is
>> the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
>> aerate the text with empty lines.
>>
>> Ex:
>>
>> some text
>> ~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
>> #end
>>
>> This is a new paragraph
>>
>> In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the
>> same
>> line since NL are significant.
>>
>> 2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
>>
>> This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining
>> between
>> "words" (same as HTML).
>> The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter
>> new
>> lines and spaces.
>> The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no
>> magic
>> anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
>> required).
>> Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
>> where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
>>
>> Ex:
>>
>> some text $nl
>> $sp next line
>>
>> #if (...)
>> this goes on the same line
>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>> #end
>>
>> $nl $nl
>> This a new paragraph
>>
>> Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
>> velocity #if to show that it would work.
>>
>> 3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow
>> "forced"
>> line breaks with "\\".
>>
>> The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
>> than 1 leave them.
>>
>> Ex:
>>
>> some text\\
>> ~ next line
>> #if (...)
>> this goes on the same line
>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>> #end
>>
>> This a new paragraph
>>
>> I'm +1 for A)
>>
>> For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
>> big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>> ______________
>>
2:23 p.m.
Ludovic Dubost wrote:
Can't we make NL be removed only before velocity
directives:
(\n\s+)#if
(\n\s+)#foreach
(\n\s+)#set
(\n\s+)#else
(\n\s+)#elseif
This would sound much better to me
Note that velocity also has its own newline removal rules, which we
can't control. This means that even if we want it, we can't introduce a
newline here:
Start the line #set($x = 'x')
... and this is on the same line
Ludovic
Vincent Massol a écrit :
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:01 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 16, 2009, at 11:49 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have all this
>>>
>>> some text $nl
>>> $sp next line
>>>
>>> #if (...)
>>> this goes on the same line
>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>> #end
>>>
>>> $nl $nl
>>> This a new paragraph
>>>
>>>
>>> Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
>>>
> The problem is that this is scripting and some construct take several
> lines for ex and you don't want to put everything on the same line
> when you code so we definitely not want to display what is typed.
>
> -Vincent
>
>
>>> The stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
>>> But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
>>>
>>> We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line for
>>> it.
>>> This sounds a good solution to me.
>>>
>> B1 means that have to put velocity code on the same line if it goes
>> on the same line and we cannot align it on following lines (as shown
>> in the example below).
>>
>> For ex:
>>
>> hello #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end
>>
>> The following will generate an extra NL:
>>
>> hello
>> #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end
>>
>> Right now we already have an important issue in velocity code that
>> make it awkward and generate lots of problems: the fact that code
>> cannot be spaced out and empty lines generate paragraphs. With B1 we
>> have the same problems but worse since NL are significants.
>>
>>
>>> I don't really understand the issur with line breaks with the new
>>> line
>>> starting with space.
>>>
>> If you strip leading spaces you need a way to force a leading space
>> when you have a line break and want to have the second line with
>> leading spaces.
>>
>>
>>> For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \ at the end of the
>>> line
>>> to remove the new line ?
>>>
>> \\ forces a line break so it's the opposite. You don't need \\ with
>> B1 since NL are significant.
>>
>> BTW if you want to see more exampleq, see
>>
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3107?focusedCommentId=37707&pag…
>>
>> Another example is:
>>
>> hello #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end #if (...)
>> ...
>>
>> meaning you have to make sure you put velocity commands one next to
>> the other or they'll be displayed on the next line.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>
>>> So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
>>>
>>> I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
>>>
>>> Vincent Massol a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>
>>>> We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
>>>> spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
>>>> If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
>>>> current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
>>>> meaningful.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
>>>> people
>>>> voted on it (only Thomas did).
>>>>
>>>> A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
>>>> - strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
>>>> - strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing
>>>> them
>>>> to the wiki syntax parser
>>>>
>>>> B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
>>>>
>>>> 1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
>>>>
>>>> Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be
>>>> able
>>>> to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
>>>> escaping the leading space with ~(space).
>>>> Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
>>>> to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
>>>> split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This
>>>> is
>>>> the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
>>>> aerate the text with empty lines.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text
>>>> ~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> This is a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the
>>>> same
>>>> line since NL are significant.
>>>>
>>>> 2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
>>>>
>>>> This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining
>>>> between
>>>> "words" (same as HTML).
>>>> The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter
>>>> new
>>>> lines and spaces.
>>>> The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no
>>>> magic
>>>> anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
>>>> required).
>>>> Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
>>>> where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text $nl
>>>> $sp next line
>>>>
>>>> #if (...)
>>>> this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> $nl $nl
>>>> This a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
>>>> velocity #if to show that it would work.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow
>>>> "forced"
>>>> line breaks with "\\".
>>>>
>>>> The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's
more
>>>> than 1 leave them.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text\\
>>>> ~ next line
>>>> #if (...)
>>>> this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> This a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> I'm +1 for A)
>>>>
>>>> For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's
too
>>>> big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
3:10 p.m.
Let's be clear with exact examples:
With B2/ rule what do we get for
I like this
#if($a==1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
blabla
I would like to get
I like this
apple
blabla
Which is passed to the following rendered.
I agree that white spaces should be non meaningful
I like this
#if($a==1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
blabla
Should get the exact same result
I like this
apple
blabla
Basically I think it should give about the same result it used to get in
syntax 1.0
Ludovic
Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit :
Ludovic Dubost wrote:
--
Ludovic Dubost
Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/
XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com
Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost
Can't we make NL be removed only before
velocity directives:
(\n\s+)#if
(\n\s+)#foreach
(\n\s+)#set
(\n\s+)#else
(\n\s+)#elseif
This would sound much better to me
Note that velocity also has its own newline removal rules, which we
can't control. This means that even if we want it, we can't introduce a
newline here:
Start the line #set($x = 'x')
... and this is on the same line
Ludovic
Vincent Massol a écrit :
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:01 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Apr 16, 2009, at 11:49 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have all this
>>>
>>> some text $nl
>>> $sp next line
>>>
>>> #if (...)
>>> this goes on the same line
>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>> #end
>>>
>>> $nl $nl
>>> This a new paragraph
>>>
>>>
>>> Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
>>>
>>>
> The problem is that this is scripting and some construct take several
> lines for ex and you don't want to put everything on the same line
> when you code so we definitely not want to display what is typed.
>
> -Vincent
>
>
>
>>> The stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
>>> But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
>>>
>>> We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line for
>>> it.
>>> This sounds a good solution to me.
>>>
>>>
>> B1 means that have to put velocity code on the same line if it goes
>> on the same line and we cannot align it on following lines (as shown
>> in the example below).
>>
>> For ex:
>>
>> hello #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end
>>
>> The following will generate an extra NL:
>>
>> hello
>> #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end
>>
>> Right now we already have an important issue in velocity code that
>> make it awkward and generate lots of problems: the fact that code
>> cannot be spaced out and empty lines generate paragraphs. With B1 we
>> have the same problems but worse since NL are significants.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I don't really understand the issur with line breaks with the new
>>> line
>>> starting with space.
>>>
>>>
>> If you strip leading spaces you need a way to force a leading space
>> when you have a line break and want to have the second line with
>> leading spaces.
>>
>>
>>
>>> For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \ at the end of the
>>> line
>>> to remove the new line ?
>>>
>>>
>> \\ forces a line break so it's the opposite. You don't need \\ with
>> B1 since NL are significant.
>>
>> BTW if you want to see more exampleq, see
>>
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3107?focusedCommentId=37707&pag…
>>
>> Another example is:
>>
>> hello #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end #if (...)
>> ...
>>
>> meaning you have to make sure you put velocity commands one next to
>> the other or they'll be displayed on the next line.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>
>>
>>> So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
>>>
>>> I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
>>>
>>> Vincent Massol a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>
>>>> We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
>>>> spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
>>>> If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
>>>> current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
>>>> meaningful.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
>>>> people
>>>> voted on it (only Thomas did).
>>>>
>>>> A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
>>>> - strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
>>>> - strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing
>>>> them
>>>> to the wiki syntax parser
>>>>
>>>> B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
>>>>
>>>> 1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
>>>>
>>>> Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be
>>>> able
>>>> to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
>>>> escaping the leading space with ~(space).
>>>> Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
>>>> to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
>>>> split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This
>>>> is
>>>> the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
>>>> aerate the text with empty lines.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text
>>>> ~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> This is a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the
>>>> same
>>>> line since NL are significant.
>>>>
>>>> 2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
>>>>
>>>> This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining
>>>> between
>>>> "words" (same as HTML).
>>>> The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter
>>>> new
>>>> lines and spaces.
>>>> The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no
>>>> magic
>>>> anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
>>>> required).
>>>> Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
>>>> where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text $nl
>>>> $sp next line
>>>>
>>>> #if (...)
>>>> this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> $nl $nl
>>>> This a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
>>>> velocity #if to show that it would work.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow
>>>> "forced"
>>>> line breaks with "\\".
>>>>
>>>> The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's
more
>>>> than 1 leave them.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text\\
>>>> ~ next line
>>>> #if (...)
>>>> this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> This a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> I'm +1 for A)
>>>>
>>>> For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's
too
>>>> big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>
3:31 p.m.
On Apr 17, 2009, at 3:10 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
Let's be clear with exact examples:
With B2/ rule what do we get for
I like this
#if($a==1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
blabla
I would like to get
I like this
apple
blabla
Which is passed to the following rendered.
I agree that white spaces should be non meaningful
I like this
#if($a==1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
blabla
In B2 you'd be able to write:
------ start here -----
I like this
## Compute the list of fruits to be...
#if ($a == 1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
$nl
blabla
------ stop here -----
Note the extra lines to present the code in a clean manner that is
readable (as we do for any java code - count the number of empty new
lines we have in code just to make it more readable).
-Vincent
Should get the exact same result
I like this
apple
blabla
Basically I think it should give about the same result it used to
get in
syntax 1.0
Ludovic
Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit :
Ludovic Dubost wrote:
--
Ludovic Dubost
Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/
XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com
Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs Can't we make NL be removed only before
velocity directives:
(\n\s+)#if
(\n\s+)#foreach
(\n\s+)#set
(\n\s+)#else
(\n\s+)#elseif
This would sound much better to me
Note that velocity also has its own newline removal rules, which we
can't control. This means that even if we want it, we can't
introduce a
newline here:
Start the line #set($x = 'x')
... and this is on the same line
Ludovic
Vincent Massol a écrit :
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:01 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Apr 16, 2009, at 11:49 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm a bit afraid by B2.. It sound really weird to me to have
>>> all this
>>>
>>> some text $nl
>>> $sp next line
>>>
>>> #if (...)
>>> this goes on the same line
>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>> #end
>>>
>>> $nl $nl
>>> This a new paragraph
>>>
>>>
>>> Not produce something that would look more like what is typed.
>>>
>>>
> The problem is that this is scripting and some construct take
> several
> lines for ex and you don't want to put everything on the same line
> when you code so we definitely not want to display what is typed.
>
> -Vincent
>
>
>
>>> The stripping of leading white spaces sounds ok to me.
>>> But the stripping of new lines sounds bad to me.
>>>
>>> We can still use ## for spacing out code if I don't want a line
>>> for
>>> it.
>>> This sounds a good solution to me.
>>>
>>>
>> B1 means that have to put velocity code on the same line if it
>> goes
>> on the same line and we cannot align it on following lines (as
>> shown
>> in the example below).
>>
>> For ex:
>>
>> hello #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end
>>
>> The following will generate an extra NL:
>>
>> hello
>> #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end
>>
>> Right now we already have an important issue in velocity code that
>> make it awkward and generate lots of problems: the fact that code
>> cannot be spaced out and empty lines generate paragraphs. With
>> B1 we
>> have the same problems but worse since NL are significants.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I don't really understand the issur with line breaks with the new
>>> line
>>> starting with space.
>>>
>>>
>> If you strip leading spaces you need a way to force a leading
>> space
>> when you have a line break and want to have the second line with
>> leading spaces.
>>
>>
>>
>>> For splitting code over 2 lines, could we use \ at the end of the
>>> line
>>> to remove the new line ?
>>>
>>>
>> \\ forces a line break so it's the opposite. You don't need \\
>> with
>> B1 since NL are significant.
>>
>> BTW if you want to see more exampleq, see
>>
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3107?focusedCommentId=37707&pag…
>>
>> Another example is:
>>
>> hello #if (...)
>> ...
>> #end #if (...)
>> ...
>>
>> meaning you have to make sure you put velocity commands one next
>> to
>> the other or they'll be displayed on the next line.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>
>>
>>> So I'm +1 B1/ -1 on B2/
>>>
>>> I'm not sure to understand the implications of A/
>>>
>>> Vincent Massol a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>
>>>> We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and
>>>> white
>>>> spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
>>>> If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/
>>>> mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
>>>> current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and
>>>> NL are
>>>> meaningful.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough
>>>> people
>>>> voted on it (only Thomas did).
>>>>
>>>> A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
>>>> - strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept
>>>> CDATA)
>>>> - strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before
>>>> passing
>>>> them
>>>> to the wiki syntax parser
>>>>
>>>> B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
>>>>
>>>> 1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
>>>>
>>>> Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't
>>>> be
>>>> able
>>>> to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces
>>>> without
>>>> escaping the leading space with ~(space).
>>>> Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new
>>>> lines
>>>> to format the text nicely (since that would add new
>>>> paragraphs) or
>>>> split a single line into several lines for extra readability.
>>>> This
>>>> is
>>>> the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be
>>>> able to
>>>> aerate the text with empty lines.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text
>>>> ~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...)
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> This is a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on
>>>> the
>>>> same
>>>> line since NL are significant.
>>>>
>>>> 2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
>>>>
>>>> This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining
>>>> between
>>>> "words" (same as HTML).
>>>> The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely
>>>> enter
>>>> new
>>>> lines and spaces.
>>>> The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no
>>>> magic
>>>> anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl
>>>> where
>>>> required).
>>>> Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with
>>>> HTML
>>>> where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text $nl
>>>> $sp next line
>>>>
>>>> #if (...)
>>>> this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> $nl $nl
>>>> This a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around
>>>> the
>>>> velocity #if to show that it would work.
>>>>
>>>> 3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow
>>>> "forced"
>>>> line breaks with "\\".
>>>>
>>>> The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's
>>>> more
>>>> than 1 leave them.
>>>>
>>>> Ex:
>>>>
>>>> some text\\
>>>> ~ next line
>>>> #if (...)
>>>> this goes on the same line
>>>> #something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
>>>> #end
>>>>
>>>> This a new paragraph
>>>>
>>>> I'm +1 for A)
>>>>
>>>> For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if
>>>> it's too
>>>> big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>
6:16 p.m.
Vincent Massol a écrit :
On Apr 17, 2009, at 3:10 PM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
Yes but if you want to actually put new lines you'll have to add $nl
I fear that this will lead to plenty of pages saved where you then
realize that you forgot plenty of $nl
Anyway, I have the feeling that we cannot know which one is good unless
we actuall test them.
Anyway to implement a mode on {{velocity}} so that we can decide later
which one to use as default ?
Ludovic
Let's be clear with exact examples:
With B2/ rule what do we get for
I like this
#if($a==1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
blabla
I would like to get
I like this
apple
blabla
Which is passed to the following rendered.
I agree that white spaces should be non meaningful
I like this
#if($a==1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
blabla
In B2 you'd be able to write:
------ start here -----
I like this
## Compute the list of fruits to be...
#if ($a == 1)
apple
#else
orange
#end
$nl
blabla
------ stop here -----
Note the extra lines to present the code in a clean manner that is
readable (as we do for any java code - count the number of empty new
lines we have in code just to make it more readable).
-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
10 a.m.
ok to go for A) and B-2)
Jerome
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi devs,
We need to come to a conclusion for handling New Lines(NL) and white
spaces (WS) in HTML and Velocity Macro.
If you remember from http://markmail.org/thread/mhqhxnz5twhev5se the
current problem is that we cannot indent scripts since WS and NL are
meaningful.
I'd like to reiterate the proposal that was sent but not enough people
voted on it (only Thomas did).
A) For the HTML macro, we propose to make the following changes:
- strip NL/WS between elements (elements that don't accept CDATA)
- strip leading/trailing NL/WS for element content before passing them
to the wiki syntax parser
B) for the Velocity macro we have 2 choices I can think of:
1) strip all leading spaces for all lines (but keep NL)
Note that this means that inside a velocity macro you wouldn't be able
to have a line break with the new line starting with spaces without
escaping the leading space with ~(space).
Note also that this means we will not be able to add extra new lines
to format the text nicely (since that would add new paragraphs) or
split a single line into several lines for extra readability. This is
the case today with the old syntax and it's a pain not to be able to
aerate the text with empty lines.
Ex:
some text
~ next line #if (...) this goes on the same line #something(...)
#end
This is a new paragraph
In this example notice that we need the velocity #if to be on the same
line since NL are significant.
2) strip all leading spaces for all lines + remove all NL too.
This means we need to ensure we still have one space remaining between
"words" (same as HTML).
The user would use something like $nl and $sp to explicitely enter new
lines and spaces.
The advantage is that you control completely the formatting (no magic
anymore) at the cost of a little extra work (adding the $nl where
required).
Basically this means the same pros/cons as when you work with HTML
where you need to explicitly add <br/> when you want new lines.
Ex:
some text $nl
$sp next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
$nl $nl
This a new paragraph
Note: I've aerated the text by putting extra new lines around the
velocity #if to show that it would work.
3) Same as 1) + strip 1 NL (i.e. line breaks) and only allow "forced"
line breaks with "\\".
The exact algorithm is: if there's 1 NL remove it, if there's more
than 1 leave them.
Ex:
some text\\
~ next line
#if (...)
this goes on the same line
#something(...) <-- this is also on the same line
#end
This a new paragraph
I'm +1 for A)
For B) I think the most flexible is 2) but I'm wondering if it's too
big a change for our users or not. If not 2) then 3).
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
5634
days inactive
5635
days old
14 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Anca Paula Luca -
Jerome Velociter -
Ludovic Dubost -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol