[TYPO3-english] Some Typoscript menus from 4.5 not working on 6.2

[bernd wilke]

Am 10.07.14 19:53, schrieb Braulio J. Solano-Rojas:
> Hello,
>
> El 08/07/2014 01:40 a.m., bernd wilke escribió:

>> as you does not state what goes wrong we can only guess.
>
> Of course.  I apologize.
>
> For a structure like:
>
> +----1
> |
> +----2
> |    |
> |    +----a
> |    |
> |    +----b
> |    |
> |    +----c
> |
> +----3
> |
> +----4
>
> That code should generate something like:
>
> <ul id="nav">
>    <li>
>      <a href="1.html" >1</a>
>      <ul>
>        <li><a href="a.html" >a</a></li>
>        <li><a href="b.html" >a</a></li>
>        <li><a href="c.html" >a</a></li>
>      </ul>
>    </li>
>    <li>
>      <a href="2.html" >2</a>
>    </li>
>    <li>
>      <a href="3.html" >3</a>
>    </li>
>    <li>
>      <a href="4.html" >4</a>
>    </li>
> </ul>
>
> But it generates something like:
>
> <ul id="nav">
>      <ul>
>        <li><a href="a.html" >a</a></li>
>        <li><a href="b.html" >a</a></li>
>        <li><a href="c.html" >a</a></li>
>      </ul>
>    </li>
>    </li>
>    </li>
>    </li>
> </ul>
>
> The CASE is broken but it has work a lot of versions of TYPO3.  It is
> very strange.

the complete rendering of stdWrap.cObject is missing.
on a second sight: stdWrap only is a container for other functions and 
no object by itself. so I would consider the construct
	stdWrap.cObject
as failure (and output from earlier TYPO3 versions as bug ;) ).
you just might use another function to give a result.
maybe you can do with
before.cObject
or
stdWrap.wrap.cObject

[...]
> The site was a Joomla! site I migrated a long ago.  That typoscript menu
> was the solution I created to port the Joomla! behavior to TYPO3.
> Doktype 15 is a doktype I created as a separator.  I did that because at
> that time the realurl extension did not take into account the TYPO3
> separators. I do not know if that behavior is still the same.

you know there is a pagetype separator in TYPO3?
so it is no page it is not linked by default. I propose you want the 
empty link for styling (a little bit css might be easier than the 
complex way of linking _all_ by yourself)


> I can change the typoscript, maybe it is time to improve it, it is not a

it might be faster and more understandable to others ;-)

> problem but I am trying to find out if it is a new bug and if I should
> report it.  Or maybe something has been deprecated on 6.2.  But from my
> point of view the code is valid even if complicated.

from time to time it is easier ad faster to rebuild something anew than 
to debug and understand again. :)

bernd
-- 
http://www.pi-phi.de/cheatsheet.html