Closed snazare closed 3 months ago
The "layout" and "section"/"column" macros are very similar in functionality and both hard to use (see existing issues). It would be beneficial I think to decide for one of them and improve that one instead of offering two half-working solutions. The layout-section
's parameter ac:type="two_equal"
does not seem very native, and the supported parameter values are basically undocumented (there are some examples in the documentation, the macro dialog just says "The layout type" with a text input and no further help). To me, it therefore seems the layout macro is more a Confluence bridge macro than anything else.
The "mathblock", "mathinline" and "mathblock reference" macros are very thin wrappers around the more generic MathJax Macro. To me they, should also be classified as Confluence bridge macros.
The "anchor" macro seems to be the exactly same as the native "id" macro in XWiki.
thank you very much for your input, @michitux ! I am modifying the description accordingly.
Currently in the pro macros package we have 19 macros that are supposed to be bridges, used only in the context of the migration. 4 of these are prefixed by "confluence_" and 15 are not. This is an issue due to the following reasons:
Proposal: we could split the pro macros into two sub modules, one "confluence bridges" and one "generic editing macros".
Generic macros that can be used in any context:
Confluence bridge macros that should be prefixed with 'confluence_' and not used as standalone macros after the migration: