Feature Proposal: I'd like FW to dynamically decide whether an edit page is needed.
The current (static) approach can cause a spurious edit session to be started,
confusing the user and possibly destroying content.
Description and Documentation
I typically open a pair of windows for my wiki work.
One contains the "view" page; the other contains the "edit" version.
In starting up, I set both to the parent page,
then click the "FooBar?" link in just one of them.
I then edit and (at some point) hit Checkpoint.
After I have entered a useful amount of content,
I go over to the other window, refresh it,
and click on the "FooBar" link.
If I don't refresh the window first,
I am sent to a second (bogus) edit window,
which I have to cancel lest I destroy my existing work.
It might not be appropriate to treat all incoming "view" links
to nonexistent pages as "edit" links.
So, perhaps the "FooBar?" (ie, edit) link should be checked dynamically,
resolving to a "FooBar" (ie, view) link if the page exists.
-- Contributors: RichMorin
- 06 Nov 2010
- 07 Nov 2010
It depends on how it is implemented.
Suppose that the form of the edit link produced for ? links were changed to include a
URL parameter. In that case, the edit UI handler could redirect (internally or externally) to "view". I do not think that need load the server too much?
--Main.MichaelTempest - 07 Nov 2010
is almost the same as
(System/CommandAndCGIScripts) - I wonder how many users actually want to have an 'error' screen - or even, how often that setting is used/tested..
in short, i agree - I also thing that Rich has reported an additional bug.
I can't think of any reason why a user that happens to open 2 edit sessions in one topic would want to lose info - we could also make the lease id'd via strikeone, and so it'd warn the user in case of potential pain.
- 07 Nov 2010