X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/631e7e0b20d301a00a04db72d0c020afa4ec2e71..ee823a02e7f3d1a50e8b57c1dbc6ed49aa3a7bb2:/doc/todo/inlines_inheriting_links.mdwn?ds=inline diff --git a/doc/todo/inlines_inheriting_links.mdwn b/doc/todo/inlines_inheriting_links.mdwn index 54249bdee..c53da51c5 100644 --- a/doc/todo/inlines_inheriting_links.mdwn +++ b/doc/todo/inlines_inheriting_links.mdwn @@ -2,15 +2,38 @@ Continuing the ideas in [[bugs/Inline doesn't wikilink to pages]]. -I thought of a use case for another feature: making [[directives/inline]] inherit the link relations of the included pages (optionally, say, with `inheritlinks=yes`). For example, if I want to list `elements/*` that have been linked to in any of `new_stuff/*`, I could try to write a [[ikiwiki/pagespec]] like +I thought of a use case for another feature: making [[ikiwiki/directive/inline]] inherit the link relations of the included pages (optionally, say, with `inheritlinks=yes`). For example, if I want to list `elements/*` that have been linked to in any of `new_stuff/*`, I could try to write a [[ikiwiki/pagespec]] like `elements/* and backlink(new_stuff/*)`. -This is not yet possible, as discussed in [[todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies/]]. +This is not yet possible, as discussed in [[todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies]]. It would be possible to work around this limitation of pagespecs if it was possible to create a page `all_new_stuff` with `\[[!inline pages="new_stuff/*" inheritlinks=yes]]`: then the desired pagespec would be expressed as `elements/* and backlink(all_new_stuff)`. +> Or, instead of specifying whether to inherit at the place of the inline, add more relations (`inline`, `backinline`) and relation composition (say, `*`, or haskell-ish `$` in order not confuse with the glob `*`) and explicitly write in the pagespecs that you want to follow the inline relation backwards: `elements/* and backlink$backinline(all_new_stuff)` or, equivalently, if [["classes"|todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies]] are implemented in pagespecs: `elements/* and backlink(backinline(all_new_stuff))`. Of course, this suggestion requires the powerful extension to pagespecs, but it gives more flexibility, and the possibility to avoid redundant information: the same pagespec at two places -- the inline and the other matching construction. +> +> BTW, adding more relations -- the `inline` relation among them -- would satisfy [[the other feature request|bugs/Inline doesn't wikilink to pages]]. --Ivan Z. + This is not just an ugly workaround. The availability of this feature has some reason: the classes of pages you want to refer to "recursively" (in that kind of complex pagespecs) tend to have some meaning themselves. So, I might indeed want to have a page like `all_new_stuff`, it would be useful for me. And at the same time I would like to write pagespecs like `elements/* and backlink(all_new_stuff)` -- and using the proposed feature in [[todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies/]] would be less clean because then I would have to enter the same information at two places: the possibly complex pagespec in the inline. And having redundant information leads to inconsistency. So in a sense, in some or most cases, it would indeed be cleaner to "store" the definition of a class of pages referred to in complex pagespecs as a separate object. And the most natural representation for this definition of a class of pages (adhering to the principle of wiki that what you mean is entered/stored in its most natural representation, not through some hidden disconnected code) is making a page with an inline/map/or the like, so that at the same time you store the definition and you see what it is (the set of pages is displayed to you). I would actually use it in my current "project" in ikiwiki: I actually edit a set of materials as a set of subpages `new_stuff/*`, and I also want to have a combined view of all of them (made through inline), and at another page, I want to list what has been linked to in `new_stuff/*` and what hasn't been linked to.--Ivan Z. + +> I see where you're coming from, but let's think about +> immplementation efficiency for a second. +> +> In order for inline inheritlinks=yes to work, +> the inline directive would need to be processed +> during the scan pass. +> +> When the directive was processed there, it would need +> to determine which pages get inlined (itself a moderatly +> expensive operation), and then determine which pages +> each of them link to. Since the scan pass is unordered, +> those pages may not have themselves been scanned yet. +> So to tell what they link to, inline would have to load +> each of them, and scan them. +> +> So there's the potential for this to slow +> down a wiki build by about a factor of 2. +> --[[Joey]]