diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/plugins/contrib/comments.mdwn | 20 |
1 files changed, 20 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/plugins/contrib/comments.mdwn b/doc/plugins/contrib/comments.mdwn index d56de4466..41bfa0004 100644 --- a/doc/plugins/contrib/comments.mdwn +++ b/doc/plugins/contrib/comments.mdwn @@ -30,6 +30,11 @@ only by direct committers. Currently, comments are always in [[ikiwiki/markdown] >> enough already. Indeed, this very page would accidentally get matched by rules >> aiming to control comment-posting... :-) --[[smcv]] +>> The best reason to keep the pages internal seems to me to be that you +>> don't want the overhead of every comment spawning its own wiki page. +>> The worst problem with it though is that you have to assume the pages +>> are mdwn (or `default_pageext`) and not support other formats. --[[Joey]] + When using this plugin, you should also enable [[htmlscrubber]] and either [[htmltidy]] or [[htmlbalance]]. Directives are filtered out by default, to avoid commenters slowing down the wiki by causing time-consuming processing. As long as the recommended plugins @@ -49,6 +54,16 @@ are enabled, comment authorship should hopefully be unforgeable by CGI users. >> I've rebased the plugin on master, made it sanitize individual posts' content >> and removed the option to disallow raw HTML. --[[smcv]] +>> There might be some use cases for other directives, such as img, in +>> comments. +>> +>> I don't know if meta is "safe" (ie, guaranteed to be inexpensive and not +>> allow users to do annoying things) or if it will continue to be in the +>> future. Hard to predict really, all that can be said with certainty is +>> all directives will contine to be inexpensive and safe enough that it's +>> sensible to allow users to (ab)use them on open wikis. +>> --[[Joey]] + When comments have been enabled generally, you still need to mark which pages can have comments, by including the `\[[!comments]]` directive in them. By default, this directive expands to a "post a comment" link plus an `\[[!inline]]` with @@ -65,11 +80,16 @@ the comments. >> Then control freaks like me could use "link(tags/comments)" and tag pages >> as allowing comments. >> +>>> Yes, I think a pagespec is the way to go. --[[Joey]] +>> >> The model used for discussion pages does require patching the existing >> page template, which I was trying to avoid - I'm not convinced that having >> every possible feature hard-coded there really scales (and obviously it's >> rather annoying while this plugin is on a branch). --[[smcv]] +>>> Using the template would allow customising the html around the comments +>>> which seems like a good thing? + The plugin adds a new [[ikiwiki/PageSpec]] match type, `postcomment`, for use with `anonok_pagespec` from the [[plugins/anonok]] plugin or `locked_pages` from the [[plugins/lockedit]] plugin. Typical usage would be something like: |