I thought about the idea of making a frontend (i.e. in the web admin) to edit routes.py and make more customizable the urls. But don't know how implement it.
On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 12:48 PM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > Please feel free to propose for new features. That was exactly the > intention. > > > On 9 Lug, 03:02, aure <aureliengir...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Great news! Thanks for the work Massimo! > > > > Being new to both, I myself still hesitate for my project between > > choosing a CMS and struggle with the programming vs. choosing web2by > > and struggle with all the things which come "for free" in a CMS... And > > Cube2py starts to bridge the gap in some ways :-) > > > > I am sure that having these new features will bring more people to > > web2py. > > > > Aurelien > > > > On Jul 9, 12:20 am, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 7, 2010, at 3:47 PM, mdipierro wrote: > > > > > > I do not have a strong opposition and I see the advantages in terms > of > > > > notation but I have two problems: > > > > > I'm tied up today, so just a quick note. I understand and generally > agree with your caveats. I have a couple of thoughts on the subject that > I'll come back with. > > > > > > The page:slug notation is handled by plugin_wiki, not by markmin. > > > > markmin just treats url, #anchor, url#anchor, page:slug all in the > > > > same way. plugin_wiki replaces the page:.. with /app/plugin_wiki/ > > > > page/.... after markmin has done its job. > > > > This decoupling was intentional to allow markmin to work without > > > > web2py and without plugin_wiki conventions. > > > > Your first suggestion would introduce coupling. Moreover it would > > > > provide a shortcut that encourage users to display the slug as text > of > > > > the link. I am not convinced this is a good idea. > > > > > > Massimo > > > > > > On 7 Lug, 17:24, Jonathan Lundell <jlund...@pobox.com> wrote: > > > >> On Jul 7, 2010, at 3:14 PM, mdipierro wrote: > > > > > >>> Right now you can do links with > > > > > >>> url > > > >>> [[name url]] > > > >>> [[name #anchor]] > > > >>> [[name url#anchor]] > > > >>> [[name page:slug]] > > > > > >>> and define an anchor with > > > > > >>> [[anchor]] > > > > > >>> If I understand your suggestions: > > > >>> 1) also allow > > > >>> [[url]] > > > >>> [[url#anchor]] > > > >>> [[#anchor]] > > > >>> [[page:slug]] > > > >>> to allow un-named links. Q: how can a link not have a name? > > > > > >> In your notation, I was thinking: > > > > > >> [[slug]] would imply [[slug page:slug]] > > > > > >> 'slug' would be used verbatim as the name, and with slug-encoding as > the slug. > > > > > >> A link would always have a name; it would just be implicit. That's > the Mediawiki convention, though they use a vertical bar to separate an > optional name from the slug. > > > > > >>> 2) use [[=anchor]] to define an anchor to avoid conflict with 1. > > > > > >>> if we do 1, we must do 2 but I would prefer [[!anchor]] then. > > > > > >> Sure. > > > > > >> Or [name:anchor], which corresponds to the html that it generates. >
