PMario wrote > > ... nobody like*d* that behaviour. > I do :-) The point is "scope for purpose." I would NOT expect everyone to like it. That is NOT the issue here which is a Minority Report. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGWQYgZZEEQ> Move on ...
I don't see a reason, why users should wait several seconds for all > tiddlers to open. ... You could create a new search, that opens all > tiddlers, which contain the "search term". ... But this would also create > a UI freeze with each keystroke. ... > You are confusing "performance" with what I am trying to DO. Performance IS an issue LATER. ... Only experienced users would use search terms, that create a list that > is small enough, that it makes sense to open it. > Right. This is not yet thinking of "everyone". I am interested in replicating a way of thought that works through reduction, not addition Your example: > > Imagine a large screen. Imagine your Tiddlers display small fragments (a >> sentence or two). Imagine it has columns. >> > = possible 50+ Tiddlers on screen at once. >> > > doesn't really convince me, other than: "I want it". ... If 1 tiddler only > contains 2 sentences there is a high chance, that order matters. Search > will probably open them "out of order". > This point is very interesting. For what I am *imagining* order is totally irrelevant. I am thinking of a BUCKET out of which you discard what you do not need to derive what you do. Early days TT -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/4791bb94-ea55-445f-b3b9-f0669c12c47f%40googlegroups.com.
