From de5838d0e79f66d5679bbdf46f2498adf05c0903 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: holger Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 11:32:38 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] --- ...istdirectives_doesn__39__t_register_a_link.mdwn | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/bugs/listdirectives_doesn__39__t_register_a_link.mdwn b/doc/bugs/listdirectives_doesn__39__t_register_a_link.mdwn index 87588cb08..19a8c99d8 100644 --- a/doc/bugs/listdirectives_doesn__39__t_register_a_link.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/listdirectives_doesn__39__t_register_a_link.mdwn @@ -35,3 +35,17 @@ The [[ikiwiki/directive/listdirectives]]` directive doesn't register a link betw > No follow-up or objection for a while, so considering this to > be [[working as designed|done]]. --[[smcv]] + +> > Seems I'm a bit late to butt in, but would it be possible to have two +> > further phases after the scan phase, the first running map and inline +> > and the second orphan? Then map and inline could log or register their +> > links (obviously somewhere were it won't change the result of the link function) +> > and orphan could take them into account. This logging could be +> > turned on by parameter to not waste time for users not needing this and +> > make it tunable (i.e. so that the user can decide which map directives count and which don't) +> > +> > For someone using map and especially autoindex the output of the orphans directive +> > is simply wrong/useless (at least it is for me). And there is no easy workaround like for listdirectives +> > -- [[holger]] + + -- 2.39.5