You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@jspwiki.apache.org by Dave Koelmeyer <da...@davekoelmeyer.co.nz> on 2014/08/19 10:35:16 UTC
Correct syntax for dynamic styles
Hi All,
Just need a bit of clarification here please. There are a few examples
listed at https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=JSPWikiStyle
where it's a little ambiguous which character sequence closes a dynamic
style section.
For example, the "special block markers" advise using double percent
marks to both open and close the style section (e.g. "%%information... %%").
Other styles advise to close the style section using slash percent (i.e.
"/%").
Then, looking at a page describing the use of say the zebra table style
(https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=Zebra%20Table%20Style),
it's advised to enclose the table using the first method, but when
looking at the actual wiki source markup for the example table on that
page, it's using the latter method.
Are these two methods basically interchangeable?
Thanks,
Dave
--
Dave Koelmeyer
http://blog.davekoelmeyer.co.nz
Re: Correct syntax for dynamic styles
Posted by Dave Koelmeyer <da...@davekoelmeyer.co.nz>.
On 20/08/14 07:14, Dirk Frederickx wrote:
> Dave,
>
> JSPWiki actually supports both syntaxes, you can freely mix them.
>
> The original syntax uses %% to close the style section.
>
> However, as things can get unreadable when nesting styles, the /% markup
> was introduced.
> (eg %%information .. /%)
> The latter is preferred as this is a much more readable markup than the
> original.
Awesome, thanks for the reply Dirk.
Cheers,
Dave
--
Dave Koelmeyer
http://blog.davekoelmeyer.co.nz
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Dave Koelmeyer <
> dave.koelmeyer@davekoelmeyer.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Just need a bit of clarification here please. There are a few examples
>> listed at https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=JSPWikiStyle
>> where it's a little ambiguous which character sequence closes a dynamic
>> style section.
>>
>> For example, the "special block markers" advise using double percent marks
>> to both open and close the style section (e.g. "%%information... %%").
>>
>> Other styles advise to close the style section using slash percent (i.e.
>> "/%").
>>
>> Then, looking at a page describing the use of say the zebra table style (
>> https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=Zebra%20Table%20Style),
>> it's advised to enclose the table using the first method, but when looking
>> at the actual wiki source markup for the example table on that page, it's
>> using the latter method.
>>
>> Are these two methods basically interchangeable?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dave
>>
>> --
>> Dave Koelmeyer
>> http://blog.davekoelmeyer.co.nz
>>
>>
Re: Correct syntax for dynamic styles
Posted by Dirk Frederickx <di...@gmail.com>.
Dave,
JSPWiki actually supports both syntaxes, you can freely mix them.
The original syntax uses %% to close the style section.
However, as things can get unreadable when nesting styles, the /% markup
was introduced.
(eg %%information .. /%)
The latter is preferred as this is a much more readable markup than the
original.
dirk
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Dave Koelmeyer <
dave.koelmeyer@davekoelmeyer.co.nz> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just need a bit of clarification here please. There are a few examples
> listed at https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=JSPWikiStyle
> where it's a little ambiguous which character sequence closes a dynamic
> style section.
>
> For example, the "special block markers" advise using double percent marks
> to both open and close the style section (e.g. "%%information... %%").
>
> Other styles advise to close the style section using slash percent (i.e.
> "/%").
>
> Then, looking at a page describing the use of say the zebra table style (
> https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=Zebra%20Table%20Style),
> it's advised to enclose the table using the first method, but when looking
> at the actual wiki source markup for the example table on that page, it's
> using the latter method.
>
> Are these two methods basically interchangeable?
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
> --
> Dave Koelmeyer
> http://blog.davekoelmeyer.co.nz
>
>