1 Changing pagespecs to be relative by default is quite feasible now, but it will cause
2 backwards compatibility problems. Should this be marked as a future plan, perhaps at a
3 major version number like 2.0? --Ethan
5 Yes, I'm looking at making this kind of change at 2.0, added to the list.
6 (Update: Didn't make it in 2.0 or 3.0...)
7 However, I have doubts that it makes good sense to go relative by default.
8 While it's not consitent with links, it seems to work better overall to
9 have pagespecs be absolute by default, IMHO. --[[Joey]]
11 I think after you work with ikiwiki for a while, it "makes more sense" for
12 them to be absolute, but I definitely remember tripping over absolute
13 pagespecs a few times when I was just starting out. Thus I think we've
14 learned to accept it as natural, where a new user wouldn't.
16 * bugs, todo, news, blog, users, and sandbox
17 are all at "toplevel", so they are equivalent whether
18 pagespecs are absolute or relative.
19 * soc doesn't refer to any pages explicitly so it doesn't matter
20 * various plugins have pagespecs at plugins/foo.mdwn: map, linkmap, orphans,
22 * I'd say most of these make more sense as having abs. pagespecs
23 * I note that your sitemap is at toplevel, but there's no reason
24 not to allow putting it in a special meta/ directory.
25 * examples/blog and examples/software site need to have relative pagespecs,
26 but they're pretty special cases -- for a real site those things
27 will probably be toplevel
28 * plugins/contrib makes more sense to inline relative (though it doesn't
31 Maybe inline should use relative pagespecs by default, and other plugins
projects / ikiwiki / blob