Thanks for the feedback, Brad. To clarify, I know you can use {{#tag:ref}} instead of <ref> as a workaround, but that's a terrible solution and undocumented https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Cite to boot. T3310 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T3310 (allowing nested tags) has been batted around for years (as the bug number attests) but doesn't seem to have any traction (although no one seems willing to decline it either). The bug I linked to, T7265 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T7265, seems like a relatively simple, straightforward solution to a common use case that still doesn't have a real solution: creating footnotes that have references. The fact that this solution has been rejected in favor of more complicated solutions that either will never happen (T3310 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T3310) or don't actually solve the problem (T8271 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T8271) is disappointing, IMO.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:17 PM Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 11:56 AM Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
While we're at it, can we add a separate <note> tag, so that we can add footnotes with their own references (rather than
having
to resort to templates)? See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T7265 (originally requested in 2006!).
The bug you linked there was correctly marked as a duplicate of T8271. You seem to have gotten it confused with T3310 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T3310, which is a separate issue with the parser in general.
Also there's no actual need for templates for the current workaround, you can use {{#tag:ref}} directly to nest them.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l