29 Jun
2012
29 Jun
'12
12:42 p.m.
i have a brand new XWiki 4.1 install
I don't have any xwiki 1.0 documents
So i put this configuration:
xwiki.rendering.syntaxes = xwiki/2.1, creole/1.0, html/4.01
When i edit the page,., it offer me those formats PLUS xwiki/1.0
Why ? How can i really disable it ?
---
I thought that XWiki is largely markup-agniostic...
Is GUI editor really uncapable of creole markup ?
--
View this message in context:
http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/disabling-xwiki-1-0-markup-tp7579990.html
Sent from the XWiki- Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
29 Jun
29 Jun
12:51 p.m.
Hi Arioch,
On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:42 PM, Arioch wrote:
i have a brand new XWiki 4.1 install
I don't have any xwiki 1.0 documents
So i put this configuration:
xwiki.rendering.syntaxes = xwiki/2.1, creole/1.0, html/4.01
When i edit the page,., it offer me those formats PLUS xwiki/1.0
Why ? How can i really disable it ?
yeah, we force xwiki/1.0 ATM. You could try editing Panels.DocumentInformation and remove
the line dealing with xwiki/1.0
It would be nice if you could open an issue for this on http://jira.xwiki.org
I thought that XWiki is largely markup-agniostic…
it is, at the level of the markup and rendering...
Is GUI editor really uncapable of creole markup ?
yes it's not supported because it would need to have a Creole Renderer written whereas
right now we have a Creole Parser only.
The reason is that the WYSIWYG needs to perform the following:
* Read wiki markup and generate HTML (supported)
* You modify the HTML (supported)
* Transform the HTML into markup again (not supported)
So Right now we written Renderers only for a few syntaxes, namely: XWiki Syntax 2.0/2.1
and XHTML/HTML.
The other limitation is that the WYISWYG editor has capabilities built in (like ability to
style selected content in certain ways) but the underlying markup may not support it. For
example creole may not support styling a portion of text with some CSS styles. So what we
would need in the future if we really want to support multiple syntax in the WYSIWYG
editor is also to add a notion of Markup Capabilities and disable features in the WYSIWYG
based on that...
Hope it makes it clear!
-Vincent
1:38 p.m.
On 06/29/2012 08:51 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi Arioch,
On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:42 PM, Arioch wrote:
Still, writing a renderer is not very hard, and we'd welcome patches for
any new output syntax.
i have a brand new XWiki 4.1 install
I don't have any xwiki 1.0 documents
So i put this configuration:
xwiki.rendering.syntaxes = xwiki/2.1, creole/1.0, html/4.01
When i edit the page,., it offer me those formats PLUS xwiki/1.0
Why ? How can i really disable it ?
yeah, we force xwiki/1.0 ATM. You could try editing Panels.DocumentInformation and remove
the line dealing with xwiki/1.0
It would be nice if you could open an issue for this on http://jira.xwiki.org
I thought that XWiki is largely markup-agniostic…
it is, at the level of the markup and rendering...
Is GUI editor really uncapable of creole markup ?
yes it's not supported because it would need to have a Creole Renderer written
whereas right now we have a Creole Parser only.
The reason is that the WYSIWYG needs to perform the following:
* Read wiki markup and generate HTML (supported)
* You modify the HTML (supported)
* Transform the HTML into markup again (not supported)
So Right now we written Renderers only for a few syntaxes, namely: XWiki Syntax 2.0/2.1
and XHTML/HTML. The other limitation is that the WYISWYG editor has
capabilities built in (like ability to style selected content in certain ways) but the
underlying markup may not support it. For example creole may not support styling a portion
of text with some CSS styles. So what we would need in the future if we really want to
support multiple syntax in the WYSIWYG editor is also to add a notion of Markup
Capabilities and disable features in the WYSIWYG based on that...
Hope it makes it clear!
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
2:37 p.m.
we'd welcome patches
Oooh, as of now i'm overly busy Delphist and would remain such for a year
and too.
So i only hope i would find here and there Javists to fix my issues :-)
BTW, since you have russian localisation i though you have no problems
locale-wise. But to me OpenOffice integration and RTF import are completely
broken...
Pity it seems here marginal low priority function, looking as no one speaks
in OOO thread and this thread was answered so fast.
--
View this message in context:
http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/disabling-xwiki-1-0-markup-tp7579990p7580…
Sent from the XWiki- Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2:44 p.m.
we have a Creole Parser only.
How's that ?
I can create a page in XWiki and then switch it to Creole.
Doesn't it mean you have both creole Parser and Creole Generator ?
(or u call Generator by Renderer ? for i see "Rendered" word like some unit
that pictures the data to screen or to paper)
Transform the HTML into markup again (not supported)
Chain them ?
HTML -> XWiki 2.1 -> Creole 1.0
portion of text with some CSS styles
to me it sounds okay for documentation generation engine, but not for wiki
i think it would depend upon direction your would choose for your evolution
If documentation - then LESS/CSS is okay, but then you would need functions
like exproting sertain section with all its sub-pages (or selected few
pages) into one merged PDF/RTF/whatever.
....
Jira... oh, no. that thing that completely fails with Opera... poor me :-)))
--
View this message in context:
http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/disabling-xwiki-1-0-markup-tp7579990p7580…
Sent from the XWiki- Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
2:50 p.m.
On Jun 29, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Arioch wrote:
No you cannot do that :) That would require a Creole renderer which we don't have.
Said differently if you write in XWiki Syntax and then switch to Creole the content
won't be changed. It just happens that XWiki Syntax is a superset of the Creole syntax
so yo may think it works… ;)
Sorry but I'm not sure I understand what you mean here.
we have a
Creole Parser only.
How's that ?
I can create a page in XWiki and then switch it to Creole. Doesn't it mean you have both creole Parser and
Creole Generator ?
We only have a parser.
(or u call Generator by Renderer ? for i see
"Rendered" word like some unit
that pictures the data to screen or to paper)
Converting from XWiki 2.1 to Creole 1.0 would require a Creole Renderer…
Transform the HTML into markup again (not
supported)
Chain them ?
HTML -> XWiki 2.1 -> Creole 1.0 portion of
text with some CSS styles
to me it sounds okay for documentation generation engine, but not for wiki
i think it would depend upon direction your would choose for your evolution If documentation - then LESS/CSS is okay, but then you
would need functions
like exproting sertain section with all its sub-pages (or selected few
pages) into one merged PDF/RTF/whatever.
....
Jira... oh, no. that thing that completely fails with Opera... poor me :-)))
Thanks
-Vincent
3:14 p.m.
XWiki Syntax is a superset of the Creole syntax so yo
may think it works
So even if i would use that superset, it would not halt conversion, but
would rather damage markup (turn markup into regular text) ?
I think if such, that conversion should be prohibited by engine
Sorry but I'm not sure I understand what you mean
here.
The goals and expected features are different for different applications.
To me wiki is for quick and easy dropping and exchanging the notes.
Fancy style is secondary.
Fancy unique styles for different paragraphs is even not a minor feature but
rather a way to make noise more than signal.
Particularly - there is no place for custom CSS for it was not designed for
average human to easily change. I would not say about errors(or intended
harm) like white text on white background.
Wiki is not HTML and for that very reason Wiki is not CSS.
If the goal is to make cute-looking web application or system to make easy
editable cute looking user help, then full support for HTML/CSS is very good
to have. I'd even better supported LESS than pure CSS. But then Wiki
features would be limited. You just cannot edit wiki-style all that visual
stuff. You can never hope to get in Creole all the visual power of CSS3.
I think wiki interoperability and visual richness for applications are
diverging trends and they ultimately would be mutually exclusive.
--
View this message in context:
http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/disabling-xwiki-1-0-markup-tp7579990p7580…
Sent from the XWiki- Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
3:23 p.m.
On Jun 29, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Arioch wrote:
There's NO conversion.
Why are you talking about styles? I just gave that as an example but there are plenty of
other examples we can take. for example not all wiki markups support interwiki links, or
even mixing bulleted and numbered list, etc.
XWiki Syntax
is a superset of the Creole syntax so yo may think it works
So even if i would use that superset, it would not halt conversion, but
would rather damage markup (turn markup into regular text) ?
I think if such, that conversion should be prohibited by engine Sorry but
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here.
The goals and expected features are different for different applications.
To me wiki is for quick and easy dropping and exchanging the notes.
Fancy style is secondary.
Fancy unique styles for different paragraphs is even not a minor feature but
rather a way to make noise more than signal.
Particularly - there is no place for custom CSS for it was not designed for
average human to easily change. I would not say about errors(or intended
harm) like white text on white background.
Wiki is not HTML and for that very reason Wiki is not CSS. If the goal is to make cute-looking web application or
system to make easy
editable cute looking user help, then full support for HTML/CSS is very good
to have. I'd even better supported LESS than pure CSS. But then Wiki
features would be limited. You just cannot edit wiki-style all that visual
stuff. You can never hope to get in Creole all the visual power of CSS3.
I think wiki interoperability and visual richness for applications are
diverging trends and they ultimately would be mutually exclusive.
You have 2 choices:
* Go the Confluence way and drop wiki markup as they've just done
* Go the XWiki way and have a wiki markup expressive enough so that it still fullfils its
role of being quick to add data and also support most if not all what HTML supports
We chose the second one.
But again, that's not a problem, the main problem is that there's no Creole
Renderer written so you cannot convert to Creole syntax in XWiki ATM.
Thanks
-Vincent
2 Jul
2 Jul
9:44 a.m.
XWiki Syntax is a superset of the Creole syntax so yo
may think it works
So even if i would use that superset, it would not halt
conversion, but
would rather damage markup (turn markup into regular text) ?
I think if such, that conversion should be prohibited by engine
9:53 a.m.
On Jul 2, 2012, at 11:44 AM, Arioch wrote:
There's NO
conversion.
Okay, not the conversion, but the switch of formats
Why do you think we should disallow a user from switching format?
If your worry is that the user doesn't realize his content hasn't been converted,
we could easily add a popup explaining this when there are no renderer for the target
format.
Thanks
-Vincent
XWiki Syntax
is a superset of the Creole syntax so yo may think it works
So even if i would use
that superset, it would not halt conversion, but
would rather damage markup (turn markup into regular text) ?
I think if such, that conversion should be prohibited by engine
10:29 a.m.
like that, yes.
it's akin for double conversion
he makes rich xwiki-syntaxed page, changes to creole (some markup is no just
text), founds GUI editor dysfunctional, switches back to xwiki (escaping
text which matches markup sequences) and - here he is.
I think if there is something you can not stick into creole, then switch
should better not be permitted. Let user simplify the page 1st.
--
View this message in context:
http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/disabling-xwiki-1-0-markup-tp7579990p7580…
Sent from the XWiki- Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
11:24 a.m.
On Jul 2, 2012, at 12:29 PM, Arioch wrote:
like that, yes.
it's akin for double conversion
he makes rich xwiki-syntaxed page, changes to creole (some markup is no just
text), founds GUI editor dysfunctional, switches back to xwiki (escaping
text which matches markup sequences) and - here he is.
I think if there is something you can not stick into creole, then switch
should better not be permitted. Let user simplify the page 1st.
The best would be for you to create a jira issue at http://jira.xwiki.org about it so that
it's not forgotten and slated for implementation.
Thanks
-Vincent
4471
days inactive
4474
days old
11 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Arioch -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Vincent Massol