+ >>>>> No, it doesn't. I originally also was after that, but after discussing the
+ >>>>> complexities of supporting that with Joey, came up with this simpler scheme
+ >>>>> without many of those issues. It is the output that I primarily care about, anyway,
+ >>>>> and I do, in fact, find the present input file organisation quite nice. The output
+ >>>>> locations just aren't very good for conversion of an existing site to ikiwiki, and do
+ >>>>> make for rather ugly URLs with the .html extensions. (I do often type some URLs
+ >>>>> out of memory, when they're gone from the browser's completion history, and the
+ >>>>> .html makes that more laboursome.)
+