Feature request: Process addToBody
There's a related case to
ProcessAddToHeadAdds, which perhaps should be called
ProcessAddToBodyStart - it's needed by Google Analytics the new versions of which now wants to be invoked from the
<body>
I had a discussion about this with someone on IRC a few days (18th Aug?) back. I don't recall with whom and the logs at
http://koala.ilog.fr/twikiirc/bin/irclogger_logs/twiki are presently missing.
- Guess you talked to iradel , whoever that may be, and it was on the 17th.
--
Contributors: MartinCleaver - 21 Aug 2008
Discussion
This kinda suggests that the ADDTOHEAD solution is not generic enough, and a "ADDREQUIRE"/"EXPANDREQUIRES" is needed. More later.
--
CrawfordCurrie - 21 Aug 2008
I imagine we once talked about recursive TMPL:DEFs like
TMPL:DEF{foo} TMPL:P{foo} add my stuff here TMPL:END
With this in place we could add to the body extending the SKIN path and redefining the
beforetext
or
aftertext
macro in a template recursively. Not sure if that roles back some of the findings we had on
ProcessAddToHeadAdds.
--
MichaelDaum - 23 Aug 2008
I have implemented
ProcessAddToHeadAdds. Any ideas how to proceed on this enhancement?
--
ArthurClemens - 26 Sep 2008
I don't think recursive TMPL:DEF's is obvious enough (for sure, I have difficulty getting my head around it). Aside from anything else, there is no way to populate a TMPL:DEF from plugin code.
This is rather like the problem we have with plugin handlers. You have to choose where in the rendering pipeline to call plugin handlers; similarly, the skin author has to choose where in the templates to support arbitrary content insertion.
Right now I'm favouring something like a generic version of ADDTOHEAD.
--
CrawfordCurrie - 27 Sep 2008
We have some nasty examples of string substitution in templates, for example
SPLIT
. But this creates horribly nested and hard to maintain code.
So I think so too:
addToBody(postition)
that can re-use code from
addToHead
. Where
position
could default to
"end"
. Or
$
if we use regex.
--
ArthurClemens - 27 Sep 2008
Proposal has been "resting" since 2008. Obviously no-one wants it enough to implement it, so Rejected.
--
CrawfordCurrie - 21 Feb 2012