make linking inclusion content work+discussion

I second this request.  I just wanted to use it for the +url link formatting in http://newcurrencyfrontiers.com/wagn/Resource and found it didn't work :( --Gerry Gleason

More general handling of the "link" view option on inclusion might be a solution. So you could say: link:related and similar for card links, and maybe: linktext:My Text to format the included card as a external link showing as "My Text". Another option might be a URL cardtype that triggers link:My Text to be interpreted as I described for linktext.

  --Gerry Gleason.....Sun Nov 15 05:38:14 -0800 2009

almost works if you do naked, otherwise you're nesting quotations. we just have to find a way to get rid of the space; probably.

Gerry, "link" is shorthand for "view:link", so "link:related" seems agrammatical. Rather than anything view-specific like linktext, I'd prefer to be able to set a "title" that would be significant across inclusions. In any event, I don't see how John's use case would be represented with that syntax.

  --Ethan McCutchen.....Sun Nov 15 11:21:49 -0800 2009

Works for existent inclusions, except the link is classed as "wanted-item". If the idea is to put the double brackets in a form though, it has to work for nonexistent inclusions, which are pretty broken.

  --John Abbe.....Tue Feb 08 14:53:48 -0800 2011