On 21/12/2007, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 21/12/2007, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
<cimonavaro(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed. What we didn't have in those days
though, was transclusion. An
> interesting idea would perhaps be to transclude smaller grain portions
> of an agglomerated article into it. Not sure if that is a wise idea or not.
I believe this [is/has been] done with some of the
cricket articles.
Don't know how that experiment worked out... anyone familiar with it?
Yeah, their templates got zapped. Templates that pretend to be body
text are rather susceptible to abuse and off-watchlist article
changing, and have been used that way in the past. There's as yet no
way to say "this template can only go in these articles."
- d.