From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: documentation@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: New Wiki Software - Please help testing :) Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2019 23:13:37 +0100 Message-ID: <8B7D0E01-0BDB-404E-8D4E-195FF770E1A5@ipfire.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1417070700351255218==" List-Id: --===============1417070700351255218== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, So here is a question: I thought it would be a good idea to extend the syntax of the wiki. I am not = convinced that this is probably a bad idea. Jon is right. People just know markdown. We should stick to it as closely as = possible. I can change the images, that is very quickly done. But my question would now be about the links. Right now we have this format: [[link]] This even fetches the headline from the page called =E2=80=9Clink=E2=80=9D so= that everywhere in the wiki, the correct title is being used. There is also the option of this: [[link|Another Text]] That way, the text can be changed. Markdown links look like this: [Text](link) I am fine with the syntax. It is well known, etc. But what do we do in the first case, when we do not want to write the title? Does this look right? [](link) -Michael > On 30 May 2019, at 20:30, Jon Murphy wrote: >=20 > That is what I remember! =20 >=20 > Also from what I remember (and my memory is not good!) the [Caption] is mor= e like an ALT text. I think it is called a tool tip and it pops up after a f= ew moments. ![Caption](/image.png) would be easier to remember for people tha= t had used markdown. >=20 >=20 >> No this is not markdown. >>=20 >> Markdown would be ![Caption](/image.png). >>=20 >> Would you prefer that syntax? Is that better? >>=20 >> -Michael >>=20 >=20 --===============1417070700351255218==--