I have some unpushed changes to bookmarks.py that make it use an UNL rather than a gnx to keep track of the node which holds the bookmarks for an outline.
This means the list of bookmarks for outline A can live in outline B. This means that you can have your own private set of bookmarks (which are an alternative to clones for tracking current work / nodes of current interest). For example, I could set up leoPlugins.leo so that it displays bookmarks for plugins that interest me, without any modification to leoPlugins.leo itself. An entry in c.db, which is local to me, records the fact that plugins for leoPlugins.leo are at /home/tbrown/.leo/workbook.leo#Bookmarks-->LeoPlugins When I change the bookmarks for leoPlugins.leo, those changes actually occur in workbook.leo. I think this is very cool, but apart from leoPlugins.leo / LeoPyRef.leo, when would it be useful? Anytime you're sharing a .leo file between people who have different areas of interest within that file. So I guess the question is, how common is that? Bottom line I need to see if the new implementation's solid enough, if it is then there's no reason not to push it, otherwise it might not be worth it. Obscure note: Strictly speaking the bookmarks could be stored completely in c.db and bookmarks would have been cross file from the beginning, but I think the tendency is to store a minimum of expendable, light weight pointer type info in c.db, I'm certainly more comfortable with bookmarks being stored as nodes where they're more interactive and better covered by backups etc. Cheers -Terry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
