Question

The content of the 'format' parameter from the SEARCH variable can be very complex and large. Is it possible to use linebreaks for easy to read the content?
For example:

*without linebreaks:*

%SEARCH{
...
format="<table><tr><td>any data...</td><td>any data...</td></tr><tr><td>any data...</td><td>any data...</td><tr></table>"
}

*with linebreaks:*

%SEARCH{
...
format="
   <table>
      <tr>
         <td>any data...</td>
         <td>any data...</td>
      </tr>
      <tr>
         <td>any data...</td>
         <td>any data...</td>
      <tr>
   </table>"
}

(The usage of the 'table' HTML tag instead of wiki tables (|...|...|) is only a sample.)

Environment

-- DetlefSturm - 21 Nov 2005

Answer

If you answer a question - or someone answered one of your questions - please remember to edit the page and set the status to answered. The status selector is below the edit box.

-- DetlefSturm - 21 Nov 2005

Use $n() in the format of the FormattedSearch.

-- PeterThoeny - 21 Nov 2005

Don't think Detlef meant the output of his search. I guess he meant the input line formatting. There has been a long discussion and a brief solution about that for Dakar. See AddGluePluginToCore for the very interesting discussion and Bugs:Item260 for the solution in Dakar and you could use GluePlugin on Cairo of course.

-- FranzJosefSilli - 21 Nov 2005

Oh, I misread the question. Thanks Franz for the clarification.

-- PeterThoeny - 21 Nov 2005

Thanks a lot for the help. The GluePlugin is the right solution for my problem. After the installation of it, I can write a SEARCH commando as following:

%~~   %SEARCH{
~~~   ...
~~~   format="
*~~      <table>
*~~         <tr>
*~~            <td>any data...</td>
*~~            <td>any data...</td>
*~~         </tr>
*~~         <tr>
*~~            <td>any data...</td>
*~~            <td>any data...</td>
*~~         <tr>
*~~      </table>"
~~~   }

But for me it is a little bit confuse:

• The GluePlugin uses the syntax with '%~~', '~~~' and '*~~'
• But Bugs:Item260 describes the syntax with '++', '+-' and '+*'

-- DetlefSturm - 24 Nov 2005