X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/821d9ca1109feef363894daa41388cf94622c754..a605ee2c562323dc29852787c48a28bd03706718:/doc/todo/plugin.mdwn?ds=sidebyside

diff --git a/doc/todo/plugin.mdwn b/doc/todo/plugin.mdwn
index 8bfd6a654..b3e3a7889 100644
--- a/doc/todo/plugin.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/plugin.mdwn
@@ -1,15 +1,75 @@
 Suggestions of ideas for plugins:
 
+* enable editable, non-htmlized files
+
+    Some months ago, before upgrading my wiki, I used svn to check in an XML file
+    and a companion XSL file for client-side styling. That was cool, ikiwiki
+    copied them over unchanged and the file could be linked to as `\[[foo|foo.xml]]`.
+
+    I even had the XSL produce an `Edit` link at the top, because I wanted a simple
+    way for a web user to edit the XML. But I had to hack stuff to make the edit CGI
+    not say `foo.xml is not an editable page`.
+
+    I did that in a kind of slash-and-burn way, and apparently that's the one change
+    that was uncommitted when I upgraded ikiwiki, so now it's in the same place
+    as the wikiwyg project. On the bright side, that's a chance to think about how to
+    do it better.
+
+    Any suggestions for appropriate uses of existing plugins, or the plugin API,
+    to selectively add to the set of files in the working copy that the edit CGI
+    will consider editable? --ChapmanFlack 17July2008
+
+    > It looks like 80% of the job would be accomplished by hooking `htmlize` for
+    > the `.xml` extension. That would satisfy the `pagetype` test that causes
+    > the edit CGI to say `not an editable page`. (That happens too early for a
+    > `canedit` hook.) The `htmlize` hook could just
+    > copy in to out unchanged (this is an internal wiki, I'm not thinking hard
+    > about evil XML content right now). For extra credit, an `editcontent` hook
+    > could validate the XML. (Can an `editcontent` hook signal a content error?)
+
+    > The tricky bit seems to be to register the fact that the target file should
+    > have extension `.xml` and not `.html`.  Maybe what's needed is a generalized
+    > notion of an `htmlize` hook, one that specifies its output extension as well
+    > as its input, and isn't assumed to produce html? --ChapmanFlack 17July2008
+
+    > Belay that, there's nothing good about trying to use `htmlize` for this; too
+    > many html-specific assumptions follow. For now I'm back to an embarrassing quick
+    > hack that allows editing my xml file.  But here's the larger generalization I
+    > think this is driving at:
+
+    > IkiWiki is currently a tool that can compile a wiki by doing two things:
+    > 1. Process files of various input types _foo_ into a single output type, html, by
+    >    finding suitable _foo_->html plugins, applying various useful transformations
+    >    along the way.
+    > 1. Process files of other input types by copying them with no useful transformations at all.
+
+    > What it could be: a tool that compiles a wiki by doing this:
+    > 1. Process files of various input types _foo_ into various output types _bar_, by
+    >    finding suitable _foo_->_bar_ plugins, applying various useful transformations along
+    >    the way, but only those that apply to the _foo_->_bar_ conversion.
+    > 1. The second case above is now just a special case of 1 where _foo_->_foo_ for any
+    >    unknown _foo_ is just a copy, and no other transformations apply.
+
+    > In some ways this seems like an easy and natural generalization. `%renderedfiles`
+    > is already mostly there, keeping the actual names of rendered files without assuming
+    > an html extension. There isn't a mechanism yet to say which transformations for
+    > linkification, preprocessing, etc., apply to which in/out types, but it could be
+    > easily added without a flag day. Right now, they _all_ apply to any input type for
+    > which an `htmlize` hook exists, and _none_ otherwise. That rule could be retained
+    > with an optional hook parameter available to override it.
+
+    > The hard part is just that right now the assumption of html as the one destination
+    > type is in the code a lot. --ChapmanFlack
+
+    >> Readers who bought this also liked: [[format_escape]], [[multiple_output_formats]]
+    >> --[[JeremieKoenig]]
+
 * list of registered users - tricky because it sorta calls for a way to rebuild the page when a new user is registered. Might be better as a cgi?
 > At best, this could only show the users who have logged in, not all
 > permitted by the current auth plugin(s).  HTTP auth would need
 > web-server-specific code to list all users, and openid can't feasibly do so
 > at all. --[[JoshTriplett]]
 
-* It would be nice to be able to have a button to show "Differences" (or 
-  "Show Diff") when editing a page. Is that an option that can be enabled?
-  Using a plugin?
-
 * For PlaceWiki I want to be able to do some custom plugins, including one
   that links together subpages about the same place created by different
   users. This seems to call for a plugin that applies to every page w/o any