remove instances from an old doc

[git.ikiwiki.info.git] / doc / todo / feed_enhancements_for_inline_pages.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/todo/feed_enhancements_for_inline_pages.mdwn b/doc/todo/feed_enhancements_for_inline_pages.mdwn
index bfc7531bb47026846ea4600e9a88038b214d47a4..f13213dc2e1b108cf9436297e45679b3c047236e 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/todo/feed_enhancements_for_inline_pages.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/feed_enhancements_for_inline_pages.mdwn
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-[[!template id=gitbranch branch=GiuseppeBilotta/inlinestuff author="Giuseppe Bilotta"]]
+[[!template id=gitbranch branch=GiuseppeBilotta/inlinestuff author="[[GiuseppeBilotta]]"]]

 
 I rearranged my patchset once again, to clearly identify the origin and
 motivation of each patch, which is explained in the following.
 
 I rearranged my patchset once again, to clearly identify the origin and
 motivation of each patch, which is explained in the following.


@@ -49,6 +49,11 @@ title and wiki name rather than hard-coding the wiki name as description.
 >> sorry. I think you're also right about the safety of the key, after
 >> all it only gets interpolated with known, safe strings.
 
 >> sorry. I think you're also right about the safety of the key, after
 >> all it only gets interpolated with known, safe strings.
 

+>>> I did not mean to imply that I thought it safe. --[[Joey]] 
+
+>>>> Sorry for assuming you implied that. I do think it is safe, though
+>>>> (I defaulted to not safe just to err on the safe side).
+

 >> The question is what to do for pages that do not have a description
 >> (and are not the index). With your proposal, the Atom feed subtitle
 >> would turn up empty. We could make it conditional in the default
 >> The question is what to do for pages that do not have a description
 >> (and are not the index). With your proposal, the Atom feed subtitle
 >> would turn up empty. We could make it conditional in the default


@@ -56,6 +61,28 @@ title and wiki name rather than hard-coding the wiki name as description.
 >> else is provided, but at this point I see no reason to _not_ allow
 >> the user to choose a way to build a default description.
 
 >> else is provided, but at this point I see no reason to _not_ allow
 >> the user to choose a way to build a default description.
 

+>>> RSS requires the `<description>` element be present, it can't
+>>> be conditionalized away. But I see no reason to add the complexity
+>>> of an option to configure a default value for a field that
+>>> few RSS consumers likely even use. That's about 3 levels below useful.
+>>> --[[Joey]]
+
+>>>> The way I see it, there are three possibilities for non-index pages
+>>>> which have no description meta: (1) we leave the
+>>>> description/subtitle in feed blank, per your current proposal here
+>>>> (2) we hard-code some string to put there and (3) we make the
+>>>> string to put there configurable. Honestly, I think option #1 sucks
+>>>> aesthetically and option #2 is conceptually wrong (I'm against
+>>>> hard-coding stuff in general), which leaves option #3: however
+>>>> rarely used it would be, I still think it'd be better than #2 and
+>>>> less unaesthetical than #1.
+
+>>>> I'm also not sure what's ‘complex’ about having such an option:
+>>>> it's definitely not going to get much use, but does it hurt to have
+>>>> it? I could understand not wasting time putting it in, but since
+>>>> the code is written already … (but then again I'm known for being a
+>>>> guy who loves options).
+

 The third patch, ‘inline: allow assigning an id to postform/feedlink’,
 does just that. I don't currently use it, but it can be particularly
 useful in the postform case for example for scriptable management of
 The third patch, ‘inline: allow assigning an id to postform/feedlink’,
 does just that. I don't currently use it, but it can be particularly
 useful in the postform case for example for scriptable management of


@@ -78,6 +105,11 @@ created by `urlto()` by fixing the routine itself.
 >> Maybe something that sanitizes the config value would be better instead?
 >> What is the policy about automatic changing user config?
 
 >> Maybe something that sanitizes the config value would be better instead?
 >> What is the policy about automatic changing user config?
 

+>>> It's impossible to do for perl-format setup files. --[[Joey]]
+
+>>>> Ok. In that case I think that we should document that it must be
+>>>> slash-less. I'll cook up a patch in that sense.
+

 The inline plugin is also updated (in a separate patch) to use `urlto()`
 rather than hand-coding the feed urls. You might want to keep this
 change even if you discard the urlto patch.
 The inline plugin is also updated (in a separate patch) to use `urlto()`
 rather than hand-coding the feed urls. You might want to keep this
 change even if you discard the urlto patch.