24 Jun
2009
24 Jun
'09
2:57 p.m.
Four +1 and no other votes, doing it now
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 16:58, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>wrote;wrote:
Hi devs,
The chosen filter (B2) is becoming more and more complex (I had to
code an almost complete velocity parser to support it correctly) and
after some more usability tests from Vincent it does not look so good
after all.
I coded a very simple parser (based on another of the ideas listed)
which only take care of indentation: basically it mean it remove all
first white spaces of each line. Vincent tested it and use ## to
aerate code and actually it looks pretty good. See
http://pastebin.com/m4a681aaf for example (the B2 based one is
http://pastebin.com/m17149f85) and most of all it's just one line a
code, a simple and quick regexp replaceAll.
So i propose to put the new filter as default filter.
WDYT ?
Here is my +1
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:54, Vincent Massol<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
Hi,
We really need to close this before 1.9 final. After discussing it
with Thomas here's what we propose:
* Introduce a "mode" parameter to the Velocity macro. It's a cleaning
mode.
* Implement 2 modes for now:
- the current mode where no cleaning is done
- the B2 mode as defined below (using $nl and $sp)
* Introduce a xwiki.properties config to define the default mode
(which would be B2 by default for now)
This allows users who are already using the 2.0 syntax today to keep
using the current mode. It also allows us to introduce new cleaning
mode later on (such as the one Ludovic wanted).
WDYT?
Here's my +1
Thanks
-Vincent
PS: Please answer ASAP since 1.9 is supposed to be today and Thomas
will need a few hours to implement this.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:56 PM, 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