It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
[[passage]]
or
[[passage|passage]]
but why all named hooks have to be named? Eg:
You have to get your [keys]<keys|, your [mobile]<mobile| and your [wallet]<wallet|. You gotta |walk>[walk] and then |leave>[leave] the apartment.
(click: ?keys)[GOTCHA]
(click: ?mobile)[DONE]
(and so forth)
Isn't there a way to save time and space using named hooks, like the self-named passages? Something like this:
You have to get your [keys], your [mobile] and your [wallet]. You gotta [walk] and then [leave] the apartment.
(click: ?keys)[GOTCHA]
(click: ?mobile)[DONE]
(and so forth)
Comments
also you might have two hooks with the content 'keys' in them, but you want them to do different things when you click on them
Yes, I agree.
Maybe keep the named hooks and make a self-named hook? Like: and the names become ?keys, ?keys1 and ?keys2.
In your example every time the program saw a pair of square brackets it would think it was a hook instead of only when it found either a (macro:) or a <named tag] next to them.
Enclose them in backticks (e.g. `[not-a-hook]`), I suppose.
As another option, perhaps instead of omitting the hook tag completely, one could merely leave it empty. For example: The empty tag would signify that it's a self-naming hook (or whatever this thing would be called).
This looks nice!
This looks nice but if there's two "keys" words in the text? Will it interfere with other panels if I used (display:) before?