>> How do we handle the importing of Tiddlers with the same Title?
I have not looked at the twederation code but here's my 2 pfennings
The easiest way to do this without dependencies would be to do the following
1. The importing TiddlyWiki would assign a GUID (guid_tw_path) to the path
to the
Jed. I want to make a simple reply to your "There is nothing forcing anyone
to do anything" ... BUT, given what YOU have done, don't shy away from that
IF it will make it run easier.
The whole thing is not so easy to get your head around. Not for idiots like
me. I'm noticing its moved on a
I think one of the problems that we are having with twederation is that we
aren't making a distinction between the process of technology of fetching
tiddlers from remote wikis and the application I built to use and test it.
They are separate things. The fetching part is designed to be modular
Dragon Cotterill wrote:
Now one of the other thoughts I had was in the concept of data Tiddlers. I
> know Mario wants to see all the data of any given Tiddler, but that's a
> different matter. :) You should be able to have data WITHOUT the concept of
> how it should be displayed, but use
On Sunday, July 17, 2016 at 1:13:24 AM UTC+2, Dragon Cotterill wrote:
>
> [...] For example how do we handle the importing of Tiddlers with the same
> Title?
> I feel that it is very disingenuous to force users to create shared
> Tiddlers with different names. At the moment we are doing this by
Hi Dragon,
On Sunday, 17 July 2016 01:01:50 UTC+1, Josiah wrote:
>
> The title IS the index.
>>
>
> I agree. For single, stand alone TW's there is nothing better. It is
> intuitive for the user.
> But when it comes to sharing Tiddlers, you WILL get repeated names. What
> do you do then?
>
The
On Sunday, 17 July 2016 01:01:50 UTC+1, Josiah wrote:
>
> The title IS the index.
>
I agree. For single, stand alone TW's there is nothing better. It is
intuitive for the user.
But when it comes to sharing Tiddlers, you WILL get repeated names. What do
you do then?
On Sunday, 17 July 2016
My 2 cents...
Yes to IDs.
No to users creating them. Ever.
They should be GUIDs.
Not concatenated titles+dates or anything related to existing tiddler
data. This will likely fail and scale poorly.
They must be created "behind the scenes", but easily discovered/usable
by experienced
eric
yeah, its long schlepp around. :-)
On Sunday, 17 July 2016 03:26:20 UTC+2, Eric Shulman wrote:
>
> On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 6:08:11 PM UTC-7, Mark S. wrote:
>>
>> I'm with you on needing a unique identifier -- every real database uses
>> unique id's. I was surprised that it wasn't
On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 6:08:11 PM UTC-7, Mark S. wrote:
>
> I'm with you on needing a unique identifier -- every real database uses
> unique id's. I was surprised that it wasn't in the TW5 design.
>
> I would go further and say that linking *should* occur by ID. The thing
> about IDs is
I'm with you on needing a unique identifier -- every real database uses
unique id's. I was surprised that it wasn't in the TW5 design.
I would go further and say that linking *should* occur by ID. The thing
about IDs is that they are immutable. The thing about titles is that they
*change*
Ciao Mr Dragon
"There can be no doubt that TW is a really great concept"
TW is NOT a concept. It exists.
Titling in TW is a pain in the arse. But that is not a "federation" issue.
In the best of worlds every Tiddler would have a unique number so you could
title many tiddlers the same. As is
12 matches
Mail list logo
