Click here to edit contents of this page.
Click here to toggle editing of individual sections of the page (if possible). Watch headings for an "edit" link when available.
Append content without editing the whole page source.
Check out how this page has evolved in the past.
If you want to discuss contents of this page - this is the easiest way to do it.
View and manage file attachments for this page.
A few useful tools to manage this Site.
See pages that link to and include this page.
Change the name (also URL address, possibly the category) of the page.
View wiki source for this page without editing.
View/set parent page (used for creating breadcrumbs and structured layout).
Notify administrators if there is objectionable content in this page.
Something does not work as expected? Find out what you can do.
General Wikidot.com documentation and help section.
Wikidot.com Terms of Service - what you can, what you should not etc.
Wikidot.com Privacy Policy.
Form is not addition to page. Form renders the page. So category is either based on forms or not.
Piotr Gabryjeluk
visit my blog
Perhaps the wish could be renamed. If I understand correctly, gerdami is asking for the already-planned integration with the NewPage module.
See the "Additional functionality" section on the Data Forms design specification:
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation | Wikidot Discord server | NEW: Wikiroo, backup tool (in development)
I am just saying that a published form is actually useless1 if not integrated into a normal page.
The form:_template misses a %%content%% field to publish a classical wiki page where forms entries supplement the text content.
gerdami - Visit Handbook en Français - Rate this howto:import-simple-excel-tables-into-wikidot up!
I agree wholeheartedly. Forms should be an entry method only — placing data withing ==== divisors (I should be able to access them externally by citing %%content{n}%% just as I can access divisors of manually created divisors).
How it worked last I played with it is a whole new structure. When I go to edit a page that has a form, I really should see it just as any other wiki page rather being presented with the form data again. Forms are to make things easier on new users and to make data entry customizeable, NOT to limit MAs control.
The way things are now, well, it's not the end of the world, but it's a whole new level of unnecessary complication.
But…
If you just add a field type:wiki you could add a "content" block if you wish?
The values of the fields are in fact the %%content{x}%% blocks… only now they have a type like for example "wiki" or "text"… But off course forms are like _templates… you sould only use them for stuctured content…
Should I make an example in the sandbox?
Or first… try to explain what you want to make…
A - S I M P L E - P L A N by ARTiZEN a startingpoint for simple wikidot solutions.
I made the example anyway have a look at
http://sandbox.wikidot.com/content:_home
A - S I M P L E - P L A N by ARTiZEN a startingpoint for simple wikidot solutions.
But wiki fields do not render modules and content dividers do. A quick test: http://sandbox.wikidot.com/content:2
Forms need some improvement if we're supposed to use them to inject data (like date stamps) into our pages.
-Ed
Community Admin
Did you previously put modules in your content blocks?
A - S I M P L E - P L A N by ARTiZEN a startingpoint for simple wikidot solutions.
I can't think of an time when I did, but I just did a test and it seems modules work inside content blocks. I did find that the order= does not seem to work when using ListPages inside a content block that is formatted by a live template.
http://my-wd-local.wikidot.com/blog:modules-in-content-elements
My feeling is that the wiki field should support all Wikidot syntax.
-Ed
Community Admin
I appreciate the offer Steven, but my complaint isn't that something doesn't work, just that the way data forms are built seems to be the most complicated way to do a fairly simple task — not that it's complicated to use, but that the same functionality could have been built by wikidot with a lot less effort and fewer restrictions by basically offering us a way to script page creation and the layout of the editing window so we could direct and cue the right type of data entry per divisor from the data enterer rather than creating what seems to be a new page type.
Editing your sandbox example brings up the form again — That's part of my complaint. The form should (IMHO) be for initial page creation (for users creating data points), but optional to edit the underlying page in question. When I open the edit window, I should see the same old interface, all the information entered laid out (whether in a wiki field or not) in the divisors as my form directed them just like every other page. If I want to add something to that page I should be able to do it without having to add it to a field I don't want it in or adding new form fields in the template. Wikidot building forms this way just created a lot of extra work for them, and unnecessary restrictions on us.
Data forms should be helpers not rulers. As they are now, they seize control of the page, and I have to go through the form to alter structure at all. They should be more superficial.
I don't agree but that is MyHO :-) I think_templates are as "unflexible" as you descibe them so if they are at the same level of inflexable… then give me the user friendly form over the _templates with the content blocks… But like I said this is just MyHO.
I respect your view…just don't see the actual problem. But for me my commenting stops here. I said what I wanted to say.
A - S I M P L E - P L A N by ARTiZEN a startingpoint for simple wikidot solutions.
I did, all the time.
Data Forms wiki fields seem to inherit all of the rules of a forum post comment — not the rules of code entered into a wikidot page like it should.
Once again, I'm at a loss as to whether this is a bug fix or a feature request I want ;-) My expectation was that wiki fields would support all available syntax, just as pages do.
Edit: I'd just like to point out that I do not agree 100% with this wish or the discussion on this page… but I do believe that the wiki fields follow the wrong syntax rules as it stands now.
~ Leiger - Wikidot Community Admin - Volunteer
Wikidot: Official Documentation | Wikidot Discord server | NEW: Wikiroo, backup tool (in development)