Last modified: 2006-06-05 15:59:18 UTC
When creating a extension, enabling this feature would be very helpfull to dev's.
<script> tags), the path to a .js file, or both?
I would say both so it can please a wider range of people (two different calls).
Personaly, the path to a script file would be fine.
I've noticed $wgOut->addScript() but it seams to do nothing when a page is rendered.
You can hold info with it and check that info $wgOut->getScript() but it
I'll look into it and either tweak how the existing functions work, or add
Right now its not a big deal being the extention is in the begining stages, i
just edited the MonoBook.php file, but in the past while making forum mods &
add-ons i always tried to do the least amount of editing to the orginal files as
Thanks for the responce.
This should be done via hooks, not by adding a custom function that duplicates
what we have in the codebase already for cases like these.
(In reply to comment #5)
> This should be done via hooks, not by adding a custom function that duplicates
> what we have in the codebase already for cases like these.
I hadn't even gotten round to doing it yet. If you want to, go ahead and
implement it with hooks.
Forgotten about ?
I ran into this, and Google landed me here. In short, none of the default
templates use SkinTemplate::html to get the 'headscripts' data element that is
populated from OutputPage::getScript(). To get the data you shoved into
OutputPage::addScript(), add the following to a template in the 'right' place:
<?php $this->html('headscripts') ?>
Perhaps that should be another bug entry...
MediaWiki 1.6+ contains OutputPage::addScript() and it works. Closing FIXED.