As part of T64217 we are going to add "format" which can be either "inline" or "block". Do you think "subst" should also fit to this "format" or do we want it in different field? (preferred format of inline/block doesn't have real meaning when template is substituted)

@Jdforrester-WMF: Are you okay with this being a "must"? I'm wondering if perhaps we want to go with "should" instead.

In T67550#1731373, @eranroz wrote:

As part of T64217 we are going to add "format" which can be either "inline" or "block". Do you think "subst" should also fit to this "format" or do we want it in different field? (preferred format of inline/block doesn't have real meaning when template is substituted)

Indeed, defining a new substitute possible value for format key seems me to be a good interface implementation.

In T67550#5213145, @Pols12 wrote:

In T67550#1731373, @eranroz wrote:

As part of T64217 we are going to add "format" which can be either "inline" or "block". Do you think "subst" should also fit to this "format" or do we want it in different field? (preferred format of inline/block doesn't have real meaning when template is substituted)

Indeed, defining a new substitute possible value for format key seems me to be a good interface implementation.

+1

+1 It would be really important. I think the substitued function should be indicated by inserting a template only on a meta page because there is no reason to subst a template on an article.