Last modified: 2010-03-22 23:02:08 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 5722 - Give <noinclude> and <onlyinclude> sections a CSS class when viewing/editing the containing page
Give <noinclude> and <onlyinclude> sections a CSS class when viewing/editing ...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: MediaWiki
Classification: Unclassified
Parser (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Lowest enhancement with 1 vote (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks: css 22771
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-04-26 11:28 UTC by Phil Boswell
Modified: 2010-03-22 23:02 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Phil Boswell 2006-04-26 11:28:17 UTC
Would it be possible to arrange that <noinclude> sections be displayed with a CSS class 
to allow them to be made visible?

This would make it easier to confirm which parts of a template, for example, would NOT 
be transcluded when editing.
Comment 1 Rob Church 2006-04-26 19:25:23 UTC
This would be a poor idea. The purpose of a <noinclude> tag is to state text
which will not be retained when a template is included. This is desired to be
even for all users, including those with browsers without CSS support, and those
using screen readers.
Comment 2 locke.cole.wiki 2006-04-27 09:04:03 UTC
@ Rob Church:

This would only be significant when viewing the template (or any page which has
the <noinclude> tag in it while viewing that page directly and not via
transclusion). Just wrapping <noinclude>'d content in a span tag with it's own
CSS class so it can be overridden should satisfy this report.
Comment 3 Rob Church 2006-04-27 12:50:36 UTC
You need to be careful to be specific in future, then; this report read totally
differently to what you appear to actually be requesting.
Comment 4 Phil Boswell 2006-07-04 16:58:06 UTC
In the same way, could those areas tagged with <onlyinclude> also be given similar 
treatment?

For the avoidance of doubt, this would only be when viewing or editing the page 
containing those sections, to make it quite clear which areas of the current page 
will be included or not if it were to be transcluded somewhere.
Comment 5 Happy-melon 2010-03-14 18:23:21 UTC
What should the value of {{#ifeq: <noinclude>Foo</noinclude> | Foo | true | false }} be?  At which point in the parse process should these spans be added?
Comment 6 Bawolff (Brian Wolff) 2010-03-14 18:28:26 UTC
I could imagine problems with things like:
<noinclude> <span class="foo"></noinclude><includeonly><span class="bar"></includeonly>Some content </span>

Or even worse:

<span <noinclude> class="foo"</noinclude> <includeonly> class="bar" </includeonly> >Some content </span>
Comment 7 Aryeh Gregor (not reading bugmail, please e-mail directly) 2010-03-22 23:02:08 UTC
This is totally impractical; <noinclude> et al. can enclose absolutely anything, including stuff that produces only wikitext markup.  Forget about the above, try:

{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>foo}}

It's extremely unlikely you'd be able to do this sanely.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links