@Clutterstack I'm not surprised, I hammered this out very quickly with no
regard for error handling or edge cases. I think it illustrates the point
well enough, i.e. making use of in built facilities for manipulating
tiddlers even when the end goal is not to work with tiddler.
I also think that extending and using the parser is something that is
overlooked in TW.
Cheers,
Saq
On Thursday, August 20, 2020 at 12:10:20 AM UTC+2, clutterstack wrote:
>
> Thanks for sharing this interesting hybrid experience, Saq.
>
> A minor hiccup in my test: I managed to break it by accidentally leaving
> an empty bullet ("TypeError: list.children[i].children[0] is undefined").
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 18, 2020 at 12:43:12 PM UTC-4, Saq Imtiaz wrote:
>>
>> I am going through a busy period at the moment and don't really have time
>> for discussions, but I wanted to share a demo that may provide inspiration
>> for others working on solutions similar to Streams.
>>
>> Streams was written specifically for the ability to easily create
>> multiple tiddlers with a fast workflow while creating content. However I
>> realize that many people use it just for the fast writing experience for
>> lists, but do not actually want to create multiple tiddlers. Hopefully some
>> of those needs are met by the Editor AutoLists solution that was posted
>> recently.
>>
>> Here is another take on a better writing experience for lists that
>> leverages the advantages of breaking content into tiddlers in TW, but
>> doesn't result in multiple tiddlers in the end.
>>
>> https://saqimtiaz.github.io/sq-tw/single-tiddler-streams.html
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Saq
>>
>
--
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/60f4f234-2261-4ca7-ba2f-ce91ba6d4213o%40googlegroups.com.
