WikkaTables:Wikka

(copied from WikkaDevelopment --NilsLindenberg)

Richard Berg has provided code for very simple table code that could be placed in formatters/wakka.php. I think that one weakness that wikka has is the lack of support for any tables. Sure, I know people are thinking about syntax & extended features etc etc (I've contributed to that discussion) but I'd like to suggest that "simple" table support should be provided now if possible. Richard's code builds a table (and keep wikka links and formatting) using....
which is a basal example of code formatting we were thinking of using anyways, so when we do end up supporting tables in a more complex fashion, it should be reasonably simple for users with tables to adapt their previous code to the new code base. Anyways, I'd like to suggest that we add this code into the next release to provide basic table support. --

cell1	cell2	boldcell3
cell4	cell5	italicscell6

GmBowen

(*Blush* OK, I was missing something. From my early days with Wikka, I remembered having seen an "awkward table markup", and (much) later found a table action; the result: I thought we had both. In reality, the "awkward markup" I remembered was the action. I'll refactor the stuff below somewhat in view of this.)
The problem is not that Wikka has "lack of support for any tables" - we have a table action that serves as a "poor man's table markup". The real problems with this are:

this table "markup" (action) is basic, but at the same time very difficult to use (because it's really an action, and also because it's different from the common approach to table markup in many Wikis)

the table "markup" (action) does not support Wikka markup within its cells

it does not actually produce data table markup (which it should)

In my opinion, we should carefully determine what we want to be able to do in terms of table markup, and then look if we can find a simpler preliminary solution (a subset) that still enables us to get there. And any preliminary solution should at least address the problem of ease-of-use and generating data table markup.
Even more preliminary, I suspect that it would be possible to make our current table "markup" (action) support Wikka markup within the cells by making a change to how the Formatter processes a page - this should already address a major drawback of what we currently have and give us some breathing space to come up with a different, better markup. --JavaWoman

It was unfair of me to say that we don't have "any table support"....there's both the action & html markup....I meant wikka-markup table support that is simple and straightforward to use by "real" people (as opposed to us). Anyhow, I should, in fairness, point out that Richard's code has limitations. You can't put it around ===header=== code, @@centering@@ breaks the interpreter, there must be a blank line after the table code or it causes a real mess, and you can't escape the double pipings/table using double quotes (which I do find irritating....this is probably all easily solvable....just not by me I'm afraid). If anybody wants to "play" go here. -- GmBowen

Sorry for butting in; I've modified my wakka formatter to handle SimpleTables with the markup "||" for delimiter. It is escaped by two double quotes, and handles other wiki markup pretty well. Should solve GmBowens problems. This is a code modification. Free for all to use as they see fit ;) --TormodHaugen

If you want to include HTML markup, then yes we have two methods - but I wan't considering HTML markup; but the major drawback of our current table "markup" (action) is that we can't have Wikka markup inside the cells. So I'll see if that can be resolved first. I'm not considering any alternative markup until we have a plan for what we actually want to be able to support. A preliminary solution that may have to be thrown away again later because it doesn't lead to where we want to end up will just lead to endless confusion and waste a lot of effort. (Meanwhile, if Richard's code works for you, I won't stop you using it. ;-)) --JavaWoman

On further investigation, I found it's actually very simple to change the {{table}} action (pseudo-markup) so that it does support Wikka markup within the cells. In fact, nearly done, and I may come up with a version that does headers (th) as well. That should tide us over until we have decided on a direction for table markup. --JavaWoman

Well, scratch "very simple" and make that "reasonably simple" but I've done it. And documented it, of course. My re-write of table action is presented on the TableAction page, with documentation and examples on the TableActionInfo page. Please test thoroughly! --JavaWoman

Editable tables

I don't know if this goes against the Wiki way of doing things, but it would be nice to configure a table in which users could enter data into and then 'submit' (click a submit button I suppose) and have it saved to the page without having to 'edit page'.
--ArisStathakis

Can you post a link to a site where you can enter data without editing the page? I'm not sure what that would look like. - JsnX

GmBowen had something related (I've inserted a link to a screen capture of it in action). I can't seem to get his page to load, therefore I've linked it to its google-cache. Basically, it's a form input thing that allows you to create tables row by row and edit data cell by cell. Very tedious to initialise, (not really, just {{spreadsheet}} starts it, and then you enter rows and columns of data almost like you would in a spreadsheet -- Mike) but i suppose it could be handy just to click on celldata to edit it (and view data if the user has readonly access). This method is a lot more intuitive than the current method of creating tables, but it would involve flatdb (or a new/seperate mysql schema). Just adding to the discussion, I don't believe that this suggestion is the ultimate solution. -- Sam .....this is coming along, but having issues with re-saving with a different name. Functions all work now & refresh automatically. Script works well with individual spreadsheet. Right now, working on it so that user can have one page where all spreadsheets can be managed, and then a user can insert any of their spreadsheets anywhere using an {{inserttable}} action (and you can set function results on or off).....

http://gmbowen.educ.unb.ca/wikitest/inserttable.jpg

The "spreadsheet" (or, interactive table if you want) script uses a MYSQL table with the spreadsheet assigned by default to the page name & owner (which has to match the logged in user), although the logged in user can "force" another table name. Another "action" script allows just showing the table without the interactive nature. So the user can enter the table components using the "spreadsheet", and then show it on the page using the "showtable name=" script. The spreadsheet script allows one to calculate sum, average, count, and frequency (at this point only on the columns) and is intended to provide simple on-line spreadsheet functions for kids working on science projects which they can then embed in a written report. I'm moving the server right now which is why it isn't up. It will be in the next week. The script is a (greatly) modified version of one available from this site...http://www.ka.sara.nl/home/boven/ .... Because it's intended for kids it is reasonably user friendly, although lacking many formatting abilities that "adult" users are used to -- Mike Bowen

My 2 cents on tables. I think we should consider in the long run the possibility of a major refactoring of the syntax for tabular data. The current table action is extremely user-unfriendly (just have a look at the source of ConfigurationOptions). Moreover, the table action does not convert wikka-formatted strings, which in some cases is a little annoying. It think a nice idea would be to have tables directly handled in the formatter, instead of using an action. I like very much the wacko approach to tables, maybe we could do even better and find a more intuitive syntax. -- DarTar

I haven't checked this out yet, but doesn't UsingHTML pretty much solve the problem on table syntax? Now it's just figuring out how to edit a cell without editting a page. --Sam

If you want to work with individual cells, it sounds like you're thinking about something like this.... http://www.ycode.com/SpreadSheet/Latest/yCode_spreadSheet_simple.htm ... although it is not open source. Just providing the link for discussion purposes. -- Mike B

Tables were one of the biggest reasons for us wanting to go with Wikka over our existing WakkaWiki. However the syntax as it is right now is pretty unintuitive. Having one giant string of comma separated values just doesn't work for me. It would be nice to at least make it so you can add line breaks between rows. -- Justin F

FlexWiki* has a rich table markup that seems fairly easy to use. See FormattingRules for the basics and TableFormattingRules for the details. I'd like us to adopt at least the basics, and maybe add some of the extended possibilities gradually.
* (MS open source! And with Ward Cunningham apparently working for MS now...)
--JavaWoman

JW, an interesting syntax for tabular data is used by CitiWiki (adapted from ComaWiki): HelpMeTable -- DarTar

DT, JW, JT etc....if you "like" the table format used by CitiWiki (and I personally think it's reasonably user friendly & a good alternative), I might suggest not looking at the code at all but trying to replicate the outcome using your own coding approach. Rightly or wrongly, ComaWiki is copyrighted...at least the "new" parts are....and not released to public domain (he charges for commercial use), so using (and, in legal cases, even looking at somebodies code makes you culpable is my understanding) the code as part of wikka might lead to problems. Just food for thought. --GmBowen

Hmmm - the CitiWiki syntax looks very much like FlexWiki as far as the basic syntax is concerned - but the complete FlexiWiki table syntax is not only richer, but it's syntax "pattern" is more easily extensible, too. Do have a look and compare what they do with CitiWiki and you'll (probably) see what I mean. :) I like extensibility so I like the FlexiWiki syntax better. No problems with copyright either - it's open source.

In fact, since I expect I'll need tables for my (planned) Wiki I'd do my own mod for this if Wikka doesn't have one by the time I get may email stuff finished (hacking hard...). -- JavaWoman

I put a link on the CodeContributions page to code developed to do tables in wikini that provides formattable tables....since they and we are both wakka forks maybe the code would easily transfer to wikka.....or we could build on it to provide the functionality that people need/want. -- GmBowen

Mike, that Japanese wiki you had up the other day (still?) also has nice table markup - somewhat simpler than FlexWiki but it could also be a start. Do you have a download link for it? I'd like to have a look at their code. --JavaWoman Their sourceforge site is http://pukiwiki.sourceforge.jp/ .... somehow I got it from there. I'm nowhere near the machine that the zip is on.....but I'm sure you can get it from their sourceforge site. Hope that helps.....oops, found it on their main site....http://prdownloads.sourceforge.jp/pukiwiki/10732/pukiwiki-1.4.4.zip. -- mb

Got it - thanks Mike! --JW

Picking up on Sam's point....perhaps code written for wikka that does something like this.....

http://131.202.167.33/wiki/wakka.php?wakka=TableMaker -- GmBowen [note: This is a modified version of the linked page which replaces Dave's tablemaking code with the nice blue colors (see comments at bottom of page) with the "freely available" code from http://javascript.internet.com/ without the nice blue colors....and which describes it's code as "The script is yours!" when you access the source code....so shouldn't be any problems now folks]

All that to generate a very basic HTML table (not even a data table)? A good Wiki syntax would probably be easier to understand as well as more efficient for the basics. -- JavaWoman

Like JavaWoman, I use tables frequently, to the point that ugly is better than nothing. I upgraded to Wikka for the inline images...as a longtime user of Wakka, I had concocted just such an ugly hack:

if( !function_exists('tableize') )
{
function tableize($txt)
{
$rows = preg_replace('/\|\|(.*)\|\|/', '<tr><td>\1</td></tr>', $txt[0]);
return '<table border="1">'.str_replace('||', '</td><td>', $rows).'</table>';
}
}

$text = preg_replace_callback("/((?>(?=^\|\|.*?\|\|$)^.*?$\n?)+)/sm", 'tableize', $text);

Unfortunately, inserting it near the bottom of /formatters/wakka.php doesn't seem to work as it did in Wakka, and since I only wrote this with the aid of PHP-literate friends, I have no Wikka solution at this time. A simple regex like this isn't sufficient to develop the extensible syntax seen in FlexWiki, but I have a feeling if someone noticed the (probably obvious) incompatibility that it would be a nice holdover for JW and myself. For the future, I definitely agree that a FW-style syntax is necessary; spreadsheet abilities like in Mike B's link would be orgasmic, even if they represented a completely different feature from regular tables. -- RichardBerg

I've tried inserting this also with no luck. However, it now seems to work quite nicely at Richard's home site. For me, simple to use tables now are much more useful/important than much better tables later (I've got a class using this that I want tabularized time-trial information posted bi-weekly). Can any of the guru's here take a stab at getting this simple approach to tables working...at least "for now"? Thanks. -- GmBowen

It does not actually work at my site either, G. That page was rendered in the Wakka days; if you edited it and clicked 'store,' it would fail just like all my more recent pages. Good news, however -- while the regex above is still illegible to me, I decided to see if I could write my own. Here's a first effort (stick it right before the main preg_replace_callback):

(removed, see below)

The good: it works.

The bad: $wakka->SafeHTML doesn't like it. I'm not sure why -- W3C's validator says the output has no errors -- but for now you have to turn it off.

Also, you must have a blank line after a table!!! (very important)

(I forget whether the previous code had this limitation). I'll see if I can fix these things, but I know GmBowen wanted something quickly. -- RichardBerg

Update: here's a version that goes after the main regex. That makes it even uglier and less extensible, but you can use it without raw HTML (or any HTML setting at all; no safety checks, though it does pass W3C).

// horrible ugly table hack v2.0
if( !function_exists('quicktable') )
{
function quicktable($txt)
{
$temp = $txt[0];
$temp = "<table border='1'>\n".$temp;
$temp = preg_replace("/^\|\|(.*?)\|\|\<br \/\>$/m", "<tr><td>$1</td></tr>", $temp);
$temp = str_replace("||", "</td><td>", $temp);
$temp = str_replace("<br />", "", $temp);
$temp = $temp."</table>\n<br />";
return $temp;
}
}

$text = preg_replace_callback("/^\|\|(.*?)\|\|\<br \/\>\n\<br \/\>$/sm", "quicktable", $text);

--RichardBerg

Hi Richard. Thanks for posting this. Sadly :( I still can't get it working. (i) Do you still have to "turn off" $this->safehtml. If so, how? (ii) could you be more specific wrt where to put the code? I'm assuming formatters/wakka.php is the file to modify, and I tried it in several places at the end of the file, but no luck. Do you have to comment out any other lines? Thanks. -- GmBowen (aka Mike).

Mike, here's the file: http://richardberg.net/bin/temp/wakka.php.txt - you'll see that safehtml is still enabled (my previous short-circuit is commented out) --RichardBerg

Thanks Richard, works like a charm. What's weird, is I cannot see what is any different than what I did. Oh well, it's working now at least.

For a further addition to the resources here for table markup.....there is a code contribution at http://www.wikini.net/wakka.php?wiki=ReglesFormatageTableau by DavidDecotigny that works quite well in wikka (tested in both an earlier and the most recent version) IF $wiki->Format is changed to $wakka->Format in the code....and it's quite easy to add the code to wikka (it took me 10 minutes to install it and get it working, and that includes figuring out the small code change necessary). (Note: David didn't leave any instructions for copyright in his code, so I'm not comfortable posting it here.) -- GmBowen

Unfortunately, although it pretends to (be able to) generate table headers, what it actually does is make some datacell content bold (and not even <strong>). Any table markup syntax we adopt should be capable at least to generate real data tables, not layout tables. The markup shown here would at least have some of that capability, but the code that is actually generated is not a data table at all. --JavaWoman

Oh, point taken. Absolutely....in fact the code submission at wikini was only a suggestion for table markup (I guess wikini doesn't have table markup yet either). I wasn't actually referring to this page with an implicit suggestion that we adopt it as the official table markup approach for wikka....I know that's still in discussion and that this doesn't meet the earlier stipulated criteria. However, there are some wikka users who have voiced (and probably others who have not) a desire for simple table markup RFN....and for me this code solves a big issue. So, if somebody really wants markup right now, then this is a solution....and an improved one over RichardBerg's code above (sorry Richard) because it doesn't have the restrictions around it (as listed farther above) and can also have some "aesthetic" formatting associated with it through the css. --GmBowen

It could be a (limited) solution if the generating code would actually generate table headers instead of bold content. But if the resulting HTML markup isn't structural, then CSS "aesthetics" won't help to make the result structural, let alone make it even a bit accessible. The wiki markup shown is a good start at least (and indeed simple), but the code generating script completely misses the mark. Sorry, Mike, it doesn't solve a big issue, not even for you, I promise: it creates one. --JavaWoman

Um, and the code doesn't actually generate bold (fake) headers either...he just did it with the double-star bold markup code. It'd be better if it did generate table header code, and I've looked at the code to try and figure out how to get it to do that, but frankly because it's in French I haven't been able to figure it out at all. Real table headers would be preferential for me because one could then have a different colour for the header background than for the alternating rows beneath. --GmBowen

What I'm saying is the script doesn't generate table headers at all, only content (data cells). But have a look at what my emhanced tabel action is doing - it's taking cell content in ==...== and turns that into table header cells; the same could apply to cells with **...**. Except I think using ==...== would be more "intuitive" and would also allow you to have datacells with bold content (as my tabel action does). And you're right that with true header cells, you can do a lot nicer styling, too. Take most of their code, and a pinch of mine, stire well, bake for an hour, and you might have something primitive but actually usable ;-) --JavaWoman

CategoryDevelopmentFormatters

Comments

Comment by cs24174166-40.satx.rr.com

2004-11-24 23:05:08

The table maker which GMBowen has on his page is stolen. I am currently working with him and his site owner to have it removed. If it is not completely removed soon I will have to take other actions. Dave

Comment by GmBowen

2004-11-24 23:56:59

Harsh Dave. First, I should explain to everybody that his comment refers to scripts which generated pop-up html code that could be embedded in a wiki page with double quotes, NOT the references above to an interactive data table script....THOSE are open source (not to mention 80% written by a student for me). I sent a detailed letter to "Dave" (as both the "him" and the site and the server owner) apologizing profusely and asking permission to use his code .....describing the whole context of its use......if he wants it down rather than talking about selling it, leasing it.......or donating a modified version of it (see comment below) to support an educational non-profit site for kids WITH attribution (read, "advertising" for his commercial site) (all of which I believe I suggested in the email)......well hey, it's "down"....and since I didn't remove the copywrite info from the code, well....sheesh. You want it gone Dave, it's completely gone....don't worry about it. And my apologies for even thinking about using it. Oh, and the code it produced didn't work when it was put on a wiki page and had to be tweaked so that it would work (don't know whether that was your coding Dave or the wikka html code interpreter). My apologies for all on here....I shouldn't've posted the link to an "idea" for what might work for wikka without having heard back from "Dave" and just plain forgot to remove the link from this page. ....and if you didn't want the link to my wiki here on this wiki page Dave, you just coulda registered and removed them yourself rather than leaving the above note.....rather than trying to embarass me (which is obviously the intention of your note) all you did was guarantee that you wouldn't make any money off or from me with your product....a strange business choice indeed.

Comment by JsnX

2004-11-25 05:02:59

Don't sweat it, Mike. You have a history of crediting the source of code that you bring to Wikka. There's no question in my mind -- I'm sure you were trying to be fair and on the level with this guy.

I'd also like to add that you were one of the very first people to take an interest in Wikka and contribute ideas.... and you're still here today contributing ideas and feedback. I appreciate your involvement.

Comment by GmBowen

2004-11-25 21:10:48

Ya, thanks Jason. What I found galling about his note here was that I wasn't even considering providing the code to you folks developing the wikka....I *knew* it was Dave's (well, a commercial sites) code and I knew THEY could tell I was using it because the html code accessed a CSS file on THEIR site which I figured they could trace; I wasn't trying to hide that I was trying out the functionality of it....if I was doing that I would've written my own CSS code so it didn't access their site. I was in the process of trying to get permission to use it for my site...and my site only. I only put the link to my test of it up here so that the conversation on how to provide simple tables in wikka was enriched....that we could consider supporting the use of tables in a different way (or both ways even) than had been discussed to that point. I was by no means suggesting that we "copy" Dave's code (in fact, my comments regarding the CitiWiki/ComaWiki table code in the above block clearly indicate my thoughts on looking at someone else's code before one tries to emulate functionality). Cheers all.

Comment by GmBowen

2004-11-25 21:43:05

Oh this **IS** funny. I trolled around the web more looking for other table making software. I now suspect I know why Dave didn't reply to my written interest in arranging to use "his" code. If you check out the tablemaker at this FREE script source site (http://javascript.internet.com/miscellaneous/table-maker.html) and compare it to the table maker at Dave's site (http://www.ahfb2000.com/tablemakertool.php) you'll find almost identical functionality and design....only the "look" is a wee bit different. If you use a file comparer on the codes you'll find they're REMARKABLY similar to each other....functions defined identically and in the same order etc etc....in fact almost the only real substantive difference I could find was the use of the CSS file. Apparently what I "stole" is the "look" that site developed.....which I didn't actually care about anyways. Should've just offered me the code for a fee Dave, or for free advertising of your site, now I can use the code I care about (for generating tables) for free eh?? And, really, in my view it's not playing nice to use the word "stolen" to describe somebody using code which is available for free. Further, if you don't want somebody using code you claim to have written....try sticking a copywrite statement in it eh?? Then the rest of the world knows that you care enough about what you wrote that they'll ask permission to use it. If you stick stuff out on the web without copywriting it, well...... (My comment 3 notes above about not removing Dave's copywrite was done without checking FOR a copywrite statement....I don't remove other people's copywrite info so I made the comment from that basis. Dave didn't have any IN his pages.) Nice crossing paths with you Dave...thanks for making me persist in finding code that I can use for free.

Comment by JavaWoman

2004-11-26 01:28:54

Mike,
It's obvious to me that you haven't "stolen" anything. But I have to correct you on one point: one doesn't have to "copyright something" by adding a copyright statement - unless the work is paid for by someone else, the creator of a work HAS copyright, period - copyright statement or no.
IOW, if a creation doesn't have a copyright statement, you MUST assume it IS protected by copyright. Look up the Berne convention some time.
(And, BTW, it's "copyright" not "copywrite" :))

Comment by GmBowen

2004-11-26 15:05:40

Hiya JW,
Um, ya, I take your point....although in this case if you're mostly using someone else's code, how can you implicitly claim copyright to all of it in that way?? My argument is that in a "mix" of who did what you should specifically identify your parts if you care about those. Dave is implicitly and explicitly claiming ALL of the code as his, when it clearly is only a minority of the code that is actually his....because he's doing what you suggest (I'm inferring this of course). I'm not at all suggesting that Dave doesn't "own copyright" on what coding he did, but his note states that it is ALL his ("the tablemaker software is stolen"), and I feel that is a dishonest portrayal of where the copyright lays as for the most part the actual tablemaking part of the software in fact is not Dave's to claim as his own (unless I'm missing something).
So it boils down to what is a "work" doesn't it?? So a question for you....if code on a page is 90% from someone else then what does one have copyright to on one's page? If you're using somebody else's code through most of your coding where does your copyright start? I think this is part of what has yet to be clearly resolved in the web world. In a related issue, my understanding is that one cannot copyright a "look"....which is why some bulletin boards are complete clones of others wrt their "look", but not their actual code and there's no legal recourse (I've read some quite bitterly phrased commentary from creators of commercial bulletin boards about the skins available for some "free" ones about this issue). In other words, my understanding is that I could completely copy Dave's "look" of the tablemaking interface by altering the code myself (for instance, by not using a css file and programming the look directly) and there's diddly he could do about that (don't worry Dave, I have no interest in doing that).
One issue in Canada about creative works is specifically ABOUT the look. In one case, an artist, under direction, created an artwork for a public space under contract (in fact, a collection of pretty boring in-air flying Canada geese) and then successfully sued the owners because they decided to put red ribbons around the neck of the geese at Christmas time. The courts decided that the purchasers owned the objects, but the artist maintained creative control over the appearance and the owners had violated that and could not, for instance, tie red bows around the necks of the geese at Christmas time. This has, I think, interesting implications for web development.....even the "paid for by someone else" seems to have confusingly weird limitations. Does this mean that re-designing the css file provided by a designer/programmer of a web site would violate his/her ownership of the "look"??? Hmmm....
And I agree with your point (the one WAAAYYY above) that doing tables this way is an awkward way of generating tables in wikka and that a clear wikka markup syntax would probably be better....although the wysiwyg approach of Victor Manuel Varela using htmlarea *really* solves the issue (and, if security issues could be resolved, that's where I'd REALLY like to see the editing interface go).
(and I'm ALWAYS spelling that word incorrectly....feel free to keep correcting me ;-) ) cheers, m

Comment by NilsLindenberg

2004-11-26 18:04:56

"a clear wikka markup syntax would probably be better"

It definitly would be! (My only comment after creating the tables on WikkaTableStructure ;-)

Comment by cs24174166-40.satx.rr.com

2004-11-27 18:02:03

Point 1: the HTML table maker which you are now pointing to is not the table maker which you took. I have 2 table makers on ahfb2000, if it was the one you are now mentioning I would/could have no problems. The second table maker, which is the one you took is proprietary.

Point 2:You cannot get the source code by simply viewing the page and clicking view source, it takes some type of backdoor underhanded method. This is enough to have me question your motives.

_________________________________________________________________

Head cleared
__________________________________________________________________

I would like to offer my sincere apologies, it was infact the javacript version of the table maker which you had up. and not my other version http://www.ahfb2000.com/tablemakertool2.php?sub=gen_form

I hope you and your community can accept my apologies and understand my frustration when I thought it was the proprietary version which as stated above takes underhanded methods to get the source.

I will also email the admin that I had notified previously of infringement to explain that it is all my fault and that you have done nothing wrong morally or legally.

In an effort to extend an olive branch, I would like to offer myself up to discussions so that maybe you can use my other table maker in your project.

My apologies,
Dave

Comment by GeorgePetsagourakis

2004-12-14 21:58:15

I did a slight mod of the table.php file .. I needed the separate border and celpadding attributes ...

changed this :

if ($param == 'style') {$style=$value;}
if ($param == 'columns') {$columns=$value;}
if ($param == 'cellpadding')
{
$cellpadding=$value;
$border=$value;
}
if ($param == 'cells') $cells = split($delimiter, $value);

to this :
if ($param == 'style') {$style=$value;}
if ($param == 'columns') {$columns=$value;}
if ($param == 'cellpadding') { $cellpadding=$value; }
if ($param == 'border'){$border=$value; }
if ($param == 'cells') $cells = split($delimiter, $value);

hoping its usefull ..

Comment by LocK

2005-03-07 01:28:06

I've seen several way to dual w/ table from this site, but honestly, I don't think those are good choices, :(. Hmm... One of the selling point of wiki is user-friendly+easy to edit, but those solutions seem more complicated than I hard code HTML... The first example is better, but I have seen a better solution in dokuwiki, <a href="http://wiki.splitbrain.org/wiki:syntax">. I hope you guys like it. :) And I already merge it in my wiki.;-> It's not complicated to replace the orig. one, since I don't want to add code to the core, it 's a ugly hack, Haha. You know, I don't want to move around when upgrading, so I just replace the action/table.php. If u guys interested, I can post my table.php in here.

Comment by JavaWoman

2005-03-07 12:49:50

LocK,
The *choices* you've seen so far are all temporary solutions - until we have a proper table markup syntax. About which we are having these discussions.
The problem is that *good* XHTML table syntax isn't simple - and a wiki table syntax to support what's necessary for data tables consequently isn't simple either. Rather that force backwards compatibility problems by hastily picking a syntax that would have to changed again later, we prefer doing a careful design - while providing temporary solutions to not leave everyone out in the cold.

The choices (what's currently available) you've seen are good choices only in that perspective: as temporary solutions.

As to the dokuwiki table markup syntax - it's simple but not enough to support all elements that are needed for proper data tables - and the syntax doesn't seem to be easily extensible either. There's no provision for a caption or a table summary for instance, and it's not obvious how to add that given the current syntax. So I'm not in favor of adopting that.

Comment by LocK

2005-03-08 04:24:29

Jw,
I know ur concern in backwards compaitbility, but where can I found any glues of our directions will go to? It seems the progress takes forever, though I understand the neccessary of careful in here. But I do pefer some well-organized temp. table syntax for my site, since It should not be hard to write a perl script to transform to new syntax later. Otherwise, I don't know where should I put my table-needed data. At least, if u guys adopt a new syntax, I don't have to key-in the header data and cell data in those table at once. I just have to add some useful and neccessary information into it, liked the caption u mentioned before. Besides, I noticed our table syntax used currently mixed with interface and data. Don't we goto the direction of seperation between them? Liked XML & XSLT, Wiki & CSS. That's why I think the temp. syntax I adopted is more simple to transform because I just care the data. I put the interface in CSS. Or can we have a simple version of table syntax? In fact, most of us don't need so much function. Just liked the relationship between open and fopen in C, with limited function, have default value, easier to handle. Most people don't care/touch the powerful function. Is it a good choice for that kind of wrapper function?

Wikka : WikkaTables

Tables in Wikka

Table markup

Editable tables

Also, you must have a blank line after a table!!! (very important)