templates/simple.tmpl - Issue 29329984: Issue 3257 - Create uninstallation page in adblockplus.org

Side by Side Diff: templates/simple.tmpl

Issue 29329984: Issue 3257 - Create uninstallation page in adblockplus.org (Closed)

Patch Set: Fix old jinja files compatibility with markdown and implement noscript Created Nov. 19, 2015, 4:40 p.m.

Left:
Right:

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments.

Jump to:

View unified diff | Download patch

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 {#

	2 # This file is part of the Adblock Plus website,

	3 # Copyright (C) 2006-2015 Eyeo GmbH

	4 #

	5 # Adblock Plus is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify

	6 # it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 as

	7 # published by the Free Software Foundation.

	8 #

	9 # Adblock Plus is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,

	10 # but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of

	11 # MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the

	12 # GNU General Public License for more details.

	13 #

	14 # You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License

	15 # along with Adblock Plus. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

	16 #}

	17

	18 <!DOCTYPE html>

	19 <html lang="{{locale}}" dir="{{"rtl" if config.has_option("rtl", locale) else "l tr"}}">

	20 <head>

	21 <title>{{title\|translate("title")}}</title>

	22 <link rel="stylesheet" href="/css/simple.css" type="text/css" media="all" />

	23 <link rel="apple-touch-icon" href="/img/favicon-large.png" />

	24 {{head\|safe}}

	25 </head>

	26 <body>

	27 <header>

	28 <img id="logo" src="/img/adblockplus_100.png" alt="{{"Adblock Plus logo"\|t ranslate("abp-logo", "Alternative text for Adblock Plus logo image")}}" />

	29 <h1>{{title\|translate("title")}}</h1>

	30 </header>

	31 <div id="content">

	32 <section class="highlighted">
	saroyanm 2015/11/19 17:00:17 I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good idea would be nice to hear second opinion regarding that, the problem is that in case we will have several section layouts (eg. as in the firstRun page) we will need to change this implementation. kzar 2015/11/20 13:06:14 Well IMHO you should keep it out of the template i Show quoted text On 2015/11/19 17:00:17, saroyanm wrote: > I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good idea would be nice to hear > second opinion regarding that, the problem is that in case we will have several > section layouts (eg. as in the firstRun page) we will need to change this > implementation. Well IMHO you should keep it out of the template in that case, if a template isn't reusable it's kinda pointless. saroyanm 2015/11/20 18:33:54 I agree with you, the only problem is that I can't Show quoted text On 2015/11/20 13:06:14, kzar wrote: > On 2015/11/19 17:00:17, saroyanm wrote: > > I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good idea would be nice to hear > > second opinion regarding that, the problem is that in case we will have > several > > section layouts (eg. as in the firstRun page) we will need to change this > > implementation. > > Well IMHO you should keep it out of the template in that case, if a template > isn't reusable it's kinda pointless. I agree with you, the only problem is that I can't write markdown in block level html element tag and only for that reason need to have separate file in includes directory. So I'll end up with the additional 2 files, that why I was having a doubt, but seams like we do not have a choice. kzar 2015/11/21 19:01:24 I'm not sure that I understand to be honest, but I Show quoted text On 2015/11/20 18:33:54, saroyanm wrote: > On 2015/11/20 13:06:14, kzar wrote: > > On 2015/11/19 17:00:17, saroyanm wrote: > > > I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good idea would be nice to hear > > > second opinion regarding that, the problem is that in case we will have > > several > > > section layouts (eg. as in the firstRun page) we will need to change this > > > implementation. > > > > Well IMHO you should keep it out of the template in that case, if a template > > isn't reusable it's kinda pointless. > > I agree with you, the only problem is that I can't write markdown in block level > html element tag and only for that reason need to have separate file in includes > directory. So I'll end up with the additional 2 files, that why I was having a > doubt, but seams like we do not have a choice. I'm not sure that I understand to be honest, but I really dislike how uninstall-abp.tmpl and uninstall-abp-submit.tmpl files have been added. Is there truely no way to avoid that? Not only are we not actually using any Jinja2 functionality in those pages, but worse there are now two files for each page. saroyanm 2015/11/23 10:50:30 "Unlike block-level HTML tags, Markdown syntax is Show quoted text On 2015/11/21 19:01:24, kzar wrote: > On 2015/11/20 18:33:54, saroyanm wrote: > > On 2015/11/20 13:06:14, kzar wrote: > > > On 2015/11/19 17:00:17, saroyanm wrote: > > > > I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good idea would be nice to > hear > > > > second opinion regarding that, the problem is that in case we will have > > > several > > > > section layouts (eg. as in the firstRun page) we will need to change this > > > > implementation. > > > > > > Well IMHO you should keep it out of the template in that case, if a template > > > isn't reusable it's kinda pointless. > > > > I agree with you, the only problem is that I can't write markdown in block > level > > html element tag and only for that reason need to have separate file in > includes > > directory. So I'll end up with the additional 2 files, that why I was having a > > doubt, but seams like we do not have a choice. > > I'm not sure that I understand to be honest, but I really dislike how > uninstall-abp.tmpl and uninstall-abp-submit.tmpl files have been added. Is there > truely no way to avoid that? Not only are we not actually using any Jinja2 > functionality in those pages, but worse there are now two files for each page. "Unlike block-level HTML tags, Markdown syntax is processed within span-level tags." reference -> http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html while "section" is block level element I can't use have markdwon implementation as ex. below: <section> #markdown </section> But I can use ex.: "span" element for that purpose, which technically feasible, but wrong by design: <span> #markdown </span> So I can see only 2 solutions here: 1. Move "section" element to simple.tmpl and find an extension that will allow us have block level surrounding markdown elements. 2. separate unistall-abp.tmpl and unistall-abp.md like we have done currently Hope I could describe better the issue, let me know if it still not clear. kzar 2015/11/25 13:26:00 Thomas is probably better placed to suggest someth Show quoted text On 2015/11/23 10:50:30, saroyanm wrote: > On 2015/11/21 19:01:24, kzar wrote: > > On 2015/11/20 18:33:54, saroyanm wrote: > > > On 2015/11/20 13:06:14, kzar wrote: > > > > On 2015/11/19 17:00:17, saroyanm wrote: > > > > > I moved the section here, not sure if it's a good idea would be nice to > > hear > > > > > second opinion regarding that, the problem is that in case we will have > > > > several > > > > > section layouts (eg. as in the firstRun page) we will need to change > this > > > > > implementation. > > > > > > > > Well IMHO you should keep it out of the template in that case, if a > template > > > > isn't reusable it's kinda pointless. > > > > > > I agree with you, the only problem is that I can't write markdown in block > > level > > > html element tag and only for that reason need to have separate file in > > includes > > > directory. So I'll end up with the additional 2 files, that why I was having > a > > > doubt, but seams like we do not have a choice. > > > > I'm not sure that I understand to be honest, but I really dislike how > > uninstall-abp.tmpl and uninstall-abp-submit.tmpl files have been added. Is > there > > truely no way to avoid that? Not only are we not actually using any Jinja2 > > functionality in those pages, but worse there are now two files for each page. > > "Unlike block-level HTML tags, Markdown syntax is processed within span-level > tags." > reference -> http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/syntax#html > while "section" is block level element I can't use have markdwon implementation > as ex. below: > <section> > #markdown > </section> > > But I can use ex.: "span" element for that purpose, which technically feasible, > but wrong by design: > <span> > #markdown > </span> > > So I can see only 2 solutions here: > 1. Move "section" element to simple.tmpl and find an extension that will allow > us have block level surrounding markdown elements. > 2. separate unistall-abp.tmpl and unistall-abp.md like we have done currently > > Hope I could describe better the issue, let me know if it still not clear. Thomas is probably better placed to suggest something here but to me it seems crazy that we now have four files for those two pages, especially as two of them are Jinja2 templates needlessly. I mean surely using a span element wrongly is preferable to that? Or just having one .html file per page instead of a .md and a .tmpl?
	33 {{body\|safe}}

	34 </section>

	35 </div>

	36 <footer>

	37 {{"impressum"\|linkify}}{{"Legal notice"\|translate("legal-notice", "Legal n otice in the footer")}}</a>

	38 </footer>

	39 </body>

	40 </html>

OLD	NEW

« pages/uninstall-abp.md ('K') | « static/img/background-dark.png ('k') | no next file » | no next file with comments »