The problem is that everything supported so far makes markmin
self-sufficient. ajax:@{...} would require web2py.js
On Friday, 6 April 2012 11:31:47 UTC-5, Alan Etkin wrote:
>
> I like ajax:@... more than the iframe solution. iframe has not so good
> publicity AFAIK among some users. For example here:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/755795/are-iframes-html-obsolete . I
> am not saying that I would not use iframe, just that there are users
> against it.
>
> For suggesting other features, I'm afraid I don't have the enough
> experience with MARKMIN to post anything else by now.
>
> On Friday, April 6, 2012 12:51:45 PM UTC-3, Massimo Di Pierro wrote:
>>
>> I will double check. You should be able to do
>>
>> embed:@{....}
>>
>> which uses iframe.
>> perhaps we should also have a
>>
>> ajax:@{...}
>>
>> This requires some more thought. What features would you like to see?
>>
>>
>> On Friday, 6 April 2012 10:34:17 UTC-5, Alan Etkin wrote:
>>>
>>> > @{controller/function/a/r/g/s.extension} (converts to the
>>> corresponding full URL
>>> http://..../app/controller/function/a/r/g/s.extension)
>>>
>>> The example as is didn't work for me: this instead did:
>>> @{appname/controller/function.extension}
>>>
>>> And as I posted elsewhere makes a link. Now for me this could be handy
>>> too:
>>>
>>> @{appname/controller/function.extension <element key>}
>>>
>>> The above sentence would tell markmin to retrieve the action dictionary
>>> and put the element's output in the page. Markmin would have also to store
>>> the action function call somewhere to avoid redundancy.
>>>
>>> Another question.
>>>
>>> Can we do @{request.now} for example? (without the need to pass
>>> environment to the markmin helper)
>>>
>>
