wishlist, patch: inline autotitles
parent
19d04c309b
commit
82281d1aef
|
@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
|
|||
[[!tag wishlist]]
|
||||
[[!tag patch]]
|
||||
|
||||
for inlines of pages which follow a certain scheme, it might not be required to
|
||||
set the title for each individual post, but to automatically set the title.
|
||||
this can either be based on timestamp formatting, or use the already existing
|
||||
munging mechanism, which appends numbers to page titles in case that page
|
||||
already exists.
|
||||
|
||||
two [patches][1] set inline up for that, adding an additional `autotitle`
|
||||
parameter. if that is given, the regular input of the inline postform will be
|
||||
replaced with a hidden input of that text. in addition, the empty title is
|
||||
permitted (both for autotitle and regular titles, as they go in the same GET
|
||||
parameter, `title`). as the empty page title is illegal, munging is used,
|
||||
resulting in ascending numeric page titles to be created.
|
||||
|
||||
the second patch is actually a one-liner, filtering the title through sprintf.
|
||||
|
||||
### potential user interaction issues
|
||||
|
||||
this has two side effects which have to be considered: first, the empty page
|
||||
title is accepted also in normal postforms (previously, this resulted in a "bad
|
||||
page name" error); second, entering a percent sign in that field might result
|
||||
in unexpexted sprintf substitution (sprintf might not even substitute for
|
||||
common uses of percent as in "reach 10% market share", but might in others as
|
||||
in "the 10%-rule").
|
||||
|
||||
both can be circumvented by using another GET parameter for autotexts, for
|
||||
which i could provide a patch. (as of writing this, i think i'll do that.)
|
||||
|
||||
### potential security issues
|
||||
|
||||
* the autotitle's value is directly output through the template (but that's
|
||||
done in other places as well, so i assume it's safe)
|
||||
* i don't know if anything bad can happen if unfiltered content is passed to
|
||||
POSIX::strftime.
|
||||
|
||||
### further extension
|
||||
|
||||
having a pre-filled input field instead of an unchangable hidden input might be
|
||||
cool (eg for creating an entry with yesterday's date), but would be a bit of a
|
||||
problem with static pages. javascript could help with the date part, but name
|
||||
munging would be yet another thing.
|
||||
|
||||
[1]: http://...
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue