+
+> Seems about ready for me to think about pulling it into ikiwiki
+> alongside [[tips/vim_syntax_highlighting/ikiwiki.vim]]. If you'll
+> please slap a license on it. :) --[[Joey]]
+>
+>> GPL version 2 or later (if that doesn't cause any problems here). I'll add it
+>> to the file --[[jerojasro]]
+>>
+>>> I see you've put the plugin on vim.org. Do you think it makes sense to
+>>> also include a copy in ikiwiki? --[[Joey]]
+>>>
+>>>> mmm, no. There would be two copies of it, and the git repo. I'd rather have
+>>>> a unique place for the "official" version (vim.org), and another for the dev
+>>>> version (its git repo).
+>>>>
+>>>> actually, I would also suggest to upload the [[`ikiwiki.vim`|tips/vim_syntax_highlighting]] file to vim.org --[[jerojasro]]
+>>>>>
+>>>>> If you have any interest in maintaining the syntax highlighting
+>>>>> plugin and putting it there, I'd be fine with that. I think it needs
+>>>>> some slight work to catch up with changes to ikiwiki's directives
+>>>>> (!-prefixed now), and wikilinks (able to have spaces now). --[[Joey]]
+
+<a id='syn-maintenance'>
+
+>>>>>
+>>>>>> I don't really know too much about syntax definitions in vim. But I'll give it a stab. I know it fails when there are 2 \[[my text|link]] wikilinks in the same page.
+>>>>>> I'm not promising anything, though ;) --[[jerojasro]]
+>
+> Also, I have a possible other approach for finding ikiwiki's root. One
+> could consider that any subdirectory of an ikiwiki wiki is itself
+> a standalone wiki, though probably one missing a toplevel index page.
+> The relative wikilinks work such that this assumption makes sense;
+> you can build any subdirectory with ikiwiki and probably get something
+> reasonable with links that work, etc.
+>
+> So, if that's the case, then one could say that the directory that the
+> user considers to be the toplevel of their wiki is really also a subwiki,
+> enclosed in a succession of parents that go all the way down to the root
+> directory (or alternatively, to the user's home directory). I think that
+> logically makes some sense.
+>
+> And if that's the case, you can resolve an absolute link by looking for
+> the page closest to the root that matches the link.
+>
+>> I like your idea; it doesn't alter the matching of the relative links, and
+>> should work fine with absolute links too. I'll implement it, though I see
+>> some potential (but small) issues with it --[[jerojasro]]
+>
+> It may even make sense to change ikiwiki's own handling of "absolute"
+> links to work that way. But even without changing ikiwiki, I think it
+> would be a reasonable thing for vim to do. It would only fail in two
+> unusual circumstances:
+>
+> 1. There is a file further down, outside what the user considers
+> the wiki, that matches. Say a `$HOME/index.mdwn`
+> 2. An absolute link is broken in that the page linked to does
+> not exist in the root of the wiki. But it does exist in a subdir,
+> and vim would go to that file.
+>
+> --[[Joey]]
+>
+>> your approach will add more noise when the plugin grows the page-creation
+>> feature, since there will be no real root to limit the possible locations for
+>> the new page. But it is far better than demanding for a `.ikiwiki` dir --[[jerojasro]]