urosm
/
ikiwiki
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

respond

master
smcv 2015-02-13 05:14:14 -04:00 committed by admin
parent 44d82285ae
commit 30129ac328
1 changed files with 13 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

13
doc/bugs/postsparkline_and_calendar_archive_do_not_respect_meta_directives.mdwn
View File

@ -17,3 +17,16 @@ Articles par mois:
</pre> </pre>
Is it possible the `meta(date)` directives are being ignored by those plugins? --[[anarcat]] Is it possible the `meta(date)` directives are being ignored by those plugins? --[[anarcat]]
> For background, each page has two dates: creation date (`ctime`, `meta(date)`)
> and last modification date (`mtime`, `meta(updated)`). postsparkline
> defaults to showing the ctime but can be configured to use the mtime
> instead; calendar always uses ctime. So what you're doing *should* work
> like you expect.
>
> The plugins don't get to choose whether they ignore meta(date);
> the effect of a meta(date) directive in `$page` is to set `$pagectime{$page}`
> during scanning (overriding whatever was found in the filesystem), and
> that data structure is what the plugins read from. So the first thing to
> investigate is whether the ctime
> [[in your .ikiwiki/indexdb|tips/inside_dot_ikiwiki]] is correct. --[[smcv]]