X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/4293e5bd6b726db8255028d50352b563511f2c16..refs/tags/3.20190207:/doc/bugs/invalid_meta_date_or_updated_not_diagnosed.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/bugs/invalid_meta_date_or_updated_not_diagnosed.mdwn b/doc/bugs/invalid_meta_date_or_updated_not_diagnosed.mdwn
index 8789dad7a..cd39438a7 100644
--- a/doc/bugs/invalid_meta_date_or_updated_not_diagnosed.mdwn
+++ b/doc/bugs/invalid_meta_date_or_updated_not_diagnosed.mdwn
@@ -61,7 +61,8 @@ Thanks!
 > I think the historical assumption was that even if the date can't be parsed for the
 > second purpose, you still want the first purpose. However, you're right that this is
 > really fragile, and the first purpose seems fairly niche anyway.
-> In ikiwiki git master (to be released as 3.20180321 or later) I've made `\[[!meta]]`
+> In ikiwiki git master (to be released as 3.20180321 or later) I've made `\[[!meta date=...]]`
+> and `\[[!meta updated=...]]`
 > produce an error message if you don't have `Date::Parse` or if the date/time is
 > malformed.
 > 
@@ -69,3 +70,20 @@ Thanks!
 > without parsing the date, they can still use `\[[!meta name="date" content="xxx"]]`.
 >
 > [[!tag done]] --[[smcv]]
+
+> > To my defense, when I wrote this, I didn't consider this a bug: I
+> > was assuming the problem I was seeing was just some dumb mistake
+> > that I made and, indeed, there *was* one such formatting mistake.
+> >
+> > But yeah, I could have re-edited this whole thing to make it look
+> > better. I'm sorry, but I was at the end of an already long
+> > yak-shaving session...
+> >
+> > I wasn't sure if doing an error was the right way to go, as this
+> > might break rendering for existing sites... But I'm glad you fixed
+> > this anyways!
+> >
+> > Thank you for the super-fast-response! :) I also tried updating
+> > the [[meta directive documentation|ikiwiki/directive/meta]] so
+> > that it's a little more detailed about that stuff. I hope that's 
+> > alright... -- [[anarcat]]