From: smcv Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 17:21:54 +0000 (-0400) Subject: reply; disambiguate who said what X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/commitdiff_plain/ca2b8306ac47214348ab6a5ebd023c1cf7a1dae2 reply; disambiguate who said what --- diff --git a/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn b/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn index 70fcf4924..b7c9b0095 100644 --- a/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn +++ b/doc/plugins/contrib/album/discussion.mdwn @@ -649,7 +649,7 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>> In the current (album5) design, the viewer pages that are automatically >>> created to go alongside the pictures are basically stand-ins for the >>> pictures, as far as metadata, wikilinks, tags and other "first-class ->>> wiki page" things are concerned. +>>> wiki page" things are concerned. --s >>>> I can see why it's important to keep these models simple and have figured out >>>> that the viewer pages are stand-ins for the image. Just as a tought though. If @@ -661,6 +661,15 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>>> One thing to point out is that last time I tried pages can be members of >>>> arbitrary numbers of trails/albums. You just get multiple rows of navigation, one >>>> for each trail. This doesn't quite work as it's hard to know which one to click. +>>>> +>>>> --k + +>>>>> Pages can be part of arbitrarily many trails, yes - that's a consequence of +>>>>> how trails are created. If you can think of a better way to present a page +>>>>> that's in more than one trail, I'd welcome ideas... I did originally have an +>>>>> implementation where only one trail would generate links, but when I tried +>>>>> it on some (rather artificial) overlapping trails, the result was more +>>>>> confusing. --s >>> If there are to be viewer pages elsewhere in the wiki, I don't think >>> inheriting the picture's metadata is desired. Suppose you have a @@ -672,10 +681,12 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>> times - once is enough, there's only one actual photo after all. So >>> I think the "main" viewer page should be the only one that has >>> the taglinks for people/alice, people/bob, places/exampleton. +>>> --s >>>> The problem exposed by the tag page issue is very tricky. As you'd >>>> probably want the exif info, captions and titles to transfer. Just not >>>> necessarily the tags. +>>>> --k >>> My next question is, should the viewer page representing that >>> particular picture in its context of "pictures near Exampleton" @@ -683,6 +694,7 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>> previous picture near Exampleton, regardless of whether it was >>> on an earlier or later visit) be a first-class wiki page >>> at all? +>>> --s >>> * Does it make any sense to comment on "this picture in this >>> context", if your wiki has comments, or should the only @@ -714,7 +726,19 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>>> One thing to consider is the built in difference between the original and >>>> the secondary inferred by the fact that the first is an `album` the second ->>>> an `inline` +>>>> an `inline` --k + +>>>>> I had assumed that both the "original" album (the one where the picture +>>>>> is physically located), and any other places you wanted to display it, +>>>>> would be some other directive whose implementation includes a call to +>>>>> `preprocess_inline`. `inline` on its own is not enough to create +>>>>> viewer pages to display the pictures, regardless of whether you +>>>>> want them to be one-per-picture or many-per-picture, and I'm not +>>>>> going to wedge yet more functionality into that plugin :-) +>>>>> +>>>>> It might be a good idea for the thing that displays pictures not +>>>>> physically located below that point to be a different directive, yes. +>>>>> --s >>>> ### Single viewer >>>> For my own usecase what you describe makes sense. I see the content of an inline object @@ -730,12 +754,24 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>>> secondary viewers can be used as the title, caption etc might fit some contexts >>>> better than others. Personally this is fine as I see these inline based albums as >>>> compositions or views on existing content. +>>>> --k +>>>> +>>>>> This is basically what I thought at first, but I realised while +>>>>> writing my earlier comments that it would be necessary +>>>>> to hack up [[plugins/trail]] fairly seriously to make it produce +>>>>> a trail through things that are not first-class wiki pages, and +>>>>> I'm not sure how much it would be necessary to subvert the +>>>>> rendering pipeline to get the right parentlinks and so on. --s >>>> >>>> ###Multiple viewers alternative >>>> The alternative is having a page say in `/story/album.mdwn` with the following directive >>>> \[[!inline pages="/01/IMGP6494 or /02/IMGP6601 or /04/IMGP6922" sort="title" show="0" template="albumitem"]] >>>> that creates new fully fledged editable viewers for each image in `/story/album/' >>>> without tags being auto populated but backlinks to the original album viewer. +>>>> --k +>>>> +>>>>> It can't *only* be an inline, because an inline wouldn't generate the +>>>>> viewer pages, but I see what you mean. --s >>>> >>>> This would make the viewers completely independent allowing for unique titles, captions and comments >>>> depending on context. Very useful when creating powerpoint like slideshows where you might need @@ -754,6 +790,10 @@ My wishlist for the plugin would include: >>>> >>>> --[[kjs]] +I've added "--k" to some of your comments so other readers (possibly including +my future self) can keep track of our conversation, I hope you don't mind :-) +--s + ---- ## cbaines' CSS changes