On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 07:33:24PM +0200, Steve Bennett wrote:
On 8/18/06, Jay R. Ashworth <jra(a)baylink.com>
wrote:
I very strongly suspect that no one who
hasn't lived intimately with
the parser code (that's, what, 4 or 5 people? :-) could predict what
those things would do; they all seem implementation defined to me.
Or almost all...
They do illustrate why making a late pass to hotlink URLs might not be
a safe approach, though.
(oops, I should have changed the subject earlier)
Depends what you mean by a "late pass". Any "early pass" is wrong -
basically, a URL should only match if absolutely nothing else does -
no normal links, for instance. But what kind of "late pass" - is there
a parse tree that you can check to see whether the token has been
matched against anything fancier than plain text?
No, my suggestion had been to do a final pass that handled that and
several other things (like MAGIC words)... but on reflection, I think
you *don't* want that processing applied to things which have already
been parser-expanded, so I guess you have to let the parser handle them
in-line as well.
The most interesting revelation of the above tests,
for those who
missed it, is that it *is* possible to link to a page named after a
URL, but [[
http://foo.com]] won't do it (that generates a, what was
it, "direct link"). However, [[
http://foo.com]] works, although the
page ends up being called "Http://foo.com". It's not completely
inconceivable to me that one day we might want to write an article
about a URL, like if some postmodern band names an album
"http://stupid.com" or something.
Hee.
Cheers,
-- jr 'http://www.washme.com/soap.html'a
--
Jay R. Ashworth jra(a)baylink.com
Designer Baylink RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA
http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274
The Internet: We paved paradise, and put up a snarking lot.