Closed daattali closed 1 week ago
@monksy transferring this to be an issue
It's a good idea, and I do like their lightweight design. I wish I knew about them 8 years ago. I'm not sure how to handle this change in the config, this should not warrant a breaking change, but it doesn't really work well with the current config parameteres. Adding a brand new feature is easy becaue a new config parameter gets added and for old websites we can use a default value, but changing the way an existing feature works is very tricky. Let me know if you have a good solution for this.
It's a good idea, and I do like their lightweight design. I wish I knew about them 8 years ago. I'm not sure how to handle this change in the config, this should not warrant a breaking change, but it doesn't really work well with the current config parameteres. Adding a brand new feature is easy becaue a new config parameter gets added and for old websites we can use a default value, but changing the way an existing feature works is very tricky. Let me know if you have a good solution for this.
@daattali It seems that you already have a similar solution with respect to your use of the external url and css files. You check if the given attribute is a simple entry or an object. You could extend this feature using the same technique. For example let's use the email link thus you can go from:
social-network-links: email: name@host.com
to
social-network-links: email: name: name@host.com img: [uri]
such that your check will be able to determine if the email field is the first case or the second case like you do with you ext-js.html include file.
The other suggestion is that you can create a general include file that will be able to generate the li entry. Looking at the social-network-links.html include file. It is clear that you have several fields that you can define like:
The above will make it easier to add and update the format for the generated li entry.
Thanks for your input @ccorsi. While the AddToThis library is nice, I've come to the conclusion by now that it's not actually very necessary. It gets difficult to strike the balance between being feature-rich and being simple, and I'd prefer to keep this more on the simple side and keep the config as-is.
Discussed in https://github.com/daattali/beautiful-jekyll/discussions/1283