I'm writing template documentation for a wiki and wanted to include a working example of the template. However, I wrote the template to auto-categorize various fields and the entire template itself is also auto-categorized.
This means if I simply call on the template, it will categorize the doc page...and because the actual template page transcludes the doc page, the template page will also be categorized.
Is there a way to prevent these categories from automatically kicking in?
Something like the following should do the trick. Wrap the categorization in your template inside a parserfunction:
{{#ifeq: {{NAMESPACE}} | Help || [[Category:Some_Category]] }}
This sets the category when the template is transcluded onto a page that is not in the "Help" namespace.
Another option is to allow a parameter such as demo to avoid including the category.
If you don't mind being slightly cryptic, you could do the category in the template as {{{cat|[[Category:Some_Category]]}}}; then specifying the parameter as {{my template|cat=}} will prevent the category inclusion.
I'm not sure if I understand the question completely (what is "auto-categorize various fields"?). I am assuming here that you want to show a template "in action" on a documentation page - without attaching some categories (those categories the documentation page usually attaches to articles using this template) to the documentation page.
So
<onlyinclude>[[Category:Some_Category]]</onlyinclude>
will not do the job - as the template is in fact included. Right?
Try passing a parameter categorize=false to the template to indicate that categories are not to be attached in this case:
{{#ifeq:{{{categorize|}}}|false||[[Category:Some_Category]]}}
The double pipe after "false" means: if(categorize==false) then (empty), else [[Category:Some_Category]] - i.e. it is an equivalent construction for if(NOT(categorize==false))...
Good luck and thanks for all the fish,
Achim
Related
I want to make a template which automatically adds the name of person who used it in another page.
For example if I had the following template named "addedby":
Added by '~~~~'.
I want it so when I use it in the page like this:
This page was {{addedby}}
The ~~~~ is automatically replaced by the name of the user who used the template.
For example if user 'john' used the template the final page above would look like this:
This page was Added by 'john'.
Is this possible? I tried using ~~~~ but when I save the template ~~~~ is replaced directly in the template when I save it, not when I use the template in any of the pages.
It's impossible in a unsubstituted template. You could use the {{REVISIONUSER}} magic variable, but it always shows the user who made the last edit to the page not the one who added the template. You must in some way put the user name inside the page markup.
So you can either use a parameter to your template:
Added by '{{{1}}}'.
This page was {{addedby|~~~}}
or you use substitution and the trick from Template:4~ for inserting the username:
Added by '~~<noinclude></noinclude>~'.
This page was {{subst:addedby}}
(you can also make show a warning when used without subst:)
I don't think there is a particular extension for that currently. The closest to that I can recommend is https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:LastModified
I have an ~8 page site. At the moment I've got a common base template and then one quite long template for every page. Almost all of the "modules" (e.g a table, a comments table, a new comment form) are unique to their parent template, and need to be scoped to access all of the variables in that parent template.
At the moment a single page template might look like:
view.html
I would like to end up with something like:
view.comments.html
view.form.html
view.details.html
Where the code is - purely for readability - compartmentalized rather than one massive 400 line template for every page.
Can I accomplish this with Jinja? I just want a static include, whereas all of the block infrastructure looks to be designed for something a bit more sophisticated. How do people generally do this to keep their templates short and tidy?
Okay, after trawling through the documentation I discovered includes:
http://jinja.pocoo.org/docs/dev/templates/#include
These have access to the global namespace, which is what I want. This is as distinct from import macros:
http://jinja.pocoo.org/docs/dev/templates/#import
Which I had previously used and wouldn't work here. Hope this helps someone else!
I currently have a template that includes the magic variable PAGENAME and FULLPAGENAME which is then applied to a large number of pages with more detailed information on each item. I would like to transclude a part of those pages to another single summary page while maintaining PAGENAME of the parent page.
I have tried to use subst:FULLPAGENAME, however all that does is display "template:*Thepage*" on all instances where the template is called.
I have also tried to use the includeonly tag, but it doesn't seem to want to work very well.
I'm relatively new to mediawiki, any help would be appreciated.
You don't. You can have a transclusion change of arbitrary length; the software has no way of figuring out which link in that chain you need the pagename for.
I have what I feel is a very simple question about Umbraco, but one that has as of yet no apparent answer.
I have a razor template, standard stuff, with # displaying variables and some inline C# code.
At one point in the template I use:
#Umbraco.RenderMacro("myCustomMacro");
no problems there, everything works as expected.
Now, this macro is inserted on every page (it's in the master template) but I have a page property that allows the content authors to turn it on and off via a check box in the page properties, again so far so good everything works perfectly.
However I now find that for a certain "document type" this component MUST be displayed, so I've been trying to find a way to perform that check.
Now in my mind, this should be as simple as doing something like this:
#{
if(CurrentPage.documentType == "someDocTypeAliasHere")
{
//Render the macro
}
else
{
// Render the macro only if the tick box is checked
}
}
as I say, this is (or I believe it should be anyway) a very simple operation, but one that so far does not seem to have a result.
What Have I tried so far?
Well apart from reading every page on our-umbraco that mentions anything to do with razor & the #CurrentPage variable, Iv'e been through the razor properties cheat sheet, and tried what would appear to be the most common properties including (In no specific order):
#CurrentPage.NodeTypeAlias
#CurrentPage.NodeType
#CurrentPage.ContentType
#CurrentPage.DocumentType
and various letter case combinations of those, plus some others that looked like they might fit the bill.
Consistently the properties either don't exist or are empty so have no useable information in them to help determine the result.
So now after a couple of days of going round in circles, and not getting anywhere I find myself here..
(Please note: this is not a search the XSLT question, or iterate a child collection or anything like that, so any requests to post XSLT, Macros, Page templates or anything like that will be refused, all I need to do is find a way to determine the Document Type of the current page being rendered.)
Cheers
Shawty
PS: Forgot to mention, I'm using
umbraco v 4.11.8 (Assembly version: 1.0.4869.17899)
Just in case anyone asks.
In Umbraco 7 use currentPageNode.DocumentTypeAlias
In Umbraco 7.1 I use: #if (#CurrentPage.DocumentTypeAlias == "NewsItem")
think you do actually need to create a node each time when you are on the page to access the pages properties like nodetypealias and stuff, try this i have the same kind of functionality on my site, http://rdmonline.co.uk/ but in the side menu where depending on the page/section it shows a diff menu links.
#{
var currentPageID = Model.Id;
var currentPageNode = Library.NodeById(currentPageID);
if (currentPageNode.NodeTypeAlias == "someDocTypeAliasHere")
{
//Render the macro
}
else
{
// Render the macro only if the tick box is checked
}
}
Let me know if this works for you.
This is a bit unrelated to this post, but searching Google brought me to this post, so I thought I'd share in case anoyne else is dealing with this issue: In Umbraco 7, to get all content in the site for a specific type:
var articles = CurrentPage.AncestorOrSelf(1).Descendants()
.Where("DocumentTypeAlias == \"BlogPost\"").OrderBy("CreateDate desc");
If your razor view inherits from Umbraco.Web.Mvc.UmbracoViewPage, you could also use UmbracoHelper:
#if (UmbracoHelper.AssignedContentItem.DocumentTypeAlias.Equals("NewsItem")) { ... }
Querying for a specific DocumentType is also easy:
UmbracoHelper.AssignedContentItem.Descendants("NewsItem")
This code will recursively return the list of IPublishedContent nodes.
If you wish to use this list with your specific DocumentType information, these items would have to be mapped to the specific type. Other than that, IPublishedContent gives you the basic information for the nodes.
I've later saw that you have been using an older version of Umbraco. :)
This implementation is only for v7.
I have a number of templates that create headings based on a formula. I am wondering if there is anyway to create an "edit" link that will take you directly to that section? The way that it currently works, the edit link takes you to editing the template itself. Could I possibly create a customized link that would keep you on the page and take you to right part?
Here is some sample code to help clear things up...
Template:Head:
==={{{1}}}===
This is a heading titled "{{{1}}}"
Test Page:
=Section 1=
{{head|1.1}}
{{head|1.2}}
{{head|1.3}}
=Section 2=
{{head|2.1}}
{{head|2.2}}
{{head|2.3}}
At the moment, if I want to edit the information for template "2.3", I have to edit all of section 2. (Note that for this example, that isn't a big deal. For the actual templates I am working with on my site, the templates have dozens of parameters and there are sometimes 10 or more in a section.)
Bottom line, is there way to create a custom edit link inside of the {{head}} template that would take you directly to editing the templates call on the page "Test Page"? Hope that makes sense.
Edit: Is there perhaps a way to make use of "anchor" tags? Can anchors be passed in to the URL?
To restate your problem, when you transclude a section heading the header isn't treated as being part of the destination page, so the edit link takes you back to the source. So you need a separate container for the template in order to edit it individually, and a complete section is the smallest editable container.
The only way I can think of doing this is using subpages (or virtual subpages if you don't have that ennabled in this namespace, doesn't change anything). So instead of placing {{head|1.1}} on MyPage, put it on MyPage/Subpage1 and then transclude that into MyPage in the usual way ({{:MyPage/Subpage1}}).
{{head}} can then include a custom edit link to the template input by using HTML heading tags (<h2> is equal to ==, etc.) to suppress the standard edit link and then use one of these templates (probably {{ed right}}) to create a custom edit link pointing to MyPage/Subpage1.
The way to create anchors in Mediawiki, by the way, is to use a <span id="name"/> tag, but that doesn't create a container that can be edited (or at least, not that I've been able to work out through URL tinkering).
I'm pretty sure there's no way to do that. As far as MediaWiki's section editing feature is concerned, the only thing that begins a new section is a line of the form:
=== Some text here ===
with the number of = signs determining the level of the heading. There's no way to get MediaWiki to let you edit any segment of the document that doesn't begin and end with such a line (or the beginning or end of the page).
Well, OK, I'm sure you technically could do it with an extension, in the sense that you can do anything with a MediaWiki extension. All you'd need to do is provide some way (e.g. a special parameter in an edit URL) for to user to indicate "I want to edit this template", then extract the template from the wikitext, present it to the user for editing, and write the result back into the page text over the original.
The tricky part will be extracting the template from the page source. (Finding and replacing templates on a page is a fairly common task for MediaWiki bot writers, so you might want to look for ideas there.) Whatever method you end up using for that, there will probably be edge cases where you need to give up and tell the user "Sorry, but I can't figure out how that template is transcluded here."