On 9/17/06, Ligulem ligulem@pobox.com wrote:
So if this is the preferred syntax, we really should think about sitting onto http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ParserFunctions and implement:
{{#date:2006-09-14}} or {{#date:|2006-09-14}}, and additionally {{#uldate:2006-09-14}} or {{#uldate:|2006-09-14}} (for unlinked date?)
How difficult would it be to extend ParserFunctions to implement {{#date:2006-09-14}}?
This doesn't really strike me as part of what ParserFunctions are intended to be at all: calculations, not an implementation of user preferences. If this is going to be used, which I really don't think it should (the current format is much less obtrusive and confusing for new editors), it should definitely be in the core package as now, whether as a parser function or what ever.