.
Is anybody actually using this? Would it hurt if different implementation used different markup and logic for this?
-- RadomirDopieralski, 2007-01-24
JSPWiki implementation is going to use them. We already have some support. I find them to be the reason why I signed up for the project in the first place...
Maybe they could be defined a little better then? Are the placeholders like {{{}}}? They could benefit from similar escaping rules then, for example. Or are they just a number/name/hash thing?
Because the description of "memento" patter tells just about encoding the state of the objects. Quoting the object definition in the original markup is one, perfectly valid and most straightforward way of doing it. Also note, that removing it from the core spec doesn't necessarily mean removing it from implementations or from the implementation recommendations.
Is there a reason to require all wikis to use the same markup for placeholder? I can name a few. Are these reasons also good for keeping the content of placeholders standarised?
I won't fight to death over this proposal, I just thought that since there are two mentions of it, it's worth bringing up and discussing. The placeholders seem to need some attention. On the other hand, the timing might be bad, as there are also a few other pending proposals to discuss -- so maybe we shoudn't hurry with this.
Yes, I'm using placeholder for comments. I think it is a good way handle the "unknowns". I was planning to merge my plugins (which I absolutely depend on) into the placeholder element at some point.
-- MarkWharton, 2007-01-25
Should I mark this proposal as rejected?
-- RadomirDopieralski, 2007-02-14
Yes. I try to explain the concept in more detail on the Prototype page.
-- ChristophSauer, 2007-02-22