TT, I do which to express a different view point in the sprite of collaborative diversity.
Thanks for your concern. But I don't think it is an issue in the particular > use case. E.g. excerpts of scripts written in 1957. Works fine. That dating > identifies them well without need of an additional field. > See my most recent post why I think it is a problem I am happy to help with you making use of an additional field. > User created Tiddler dating would work as normal. I can't see a problem? > Perhaps you could not see the problem, thus I respectfully suggest their is. > > In any case, I intended the OP to be about better understanding the limits > on dates in TW. I'm interested in that. > >> >>> This is precisely what I am suggesting , the limits, and the limits or a de facto standard should in my view not use the system date/and time for something they are not. Lets import some great date handling libraries and make it easy to develop and use such dates. For example the mear existence of a "historical" date in a tiddler already provides information that is for historical information which enriches the solution rather than degrade the solution. Regards Tony -- 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/17c8a53c-39bf-4c99-ba21-8e4550bde3cf%40googlegroups.com.
