Bob,
Please accept this reply in the spirit it is intended, as constructive
> input into the issue of learning TW wikitext and not as an attack on
> anyone, TW or this group.
>
That is the way we work here, I personally prefer the "egoless approach".
I will Publish the updated cheat sheet in its own thread in the TiddlyWiki
Dev forums, I want peer review before the general membership takes copies.
I have provided numeric references.
>
> Your cheatsheet, which I know you passed to me before it has been
> reviewed, has a similar example
>
> <$set name='var' value='Foo'>
> <<taggingByVar>>
> </$set>
>
I can not find the use of foo in my current version of the cheat sheet.
>
> Note one difference, the use of quotes around the variable name and value
> attributes. So which is it, are quotes required or not? Do quotes matter? I
> would assume quotes do matter and if so why does the official documentation
> leave them out. I also assume the macro call should read <<taggingby var>>
> and this is just a mistype. But this hows that even such a simple
> statement's documentation is inconsistent. Now, if quotes don't matter I
> assume it is because no values have spaces? But this is an exception rule
> and as we all know one exception breeds other exceptions and soon we have
> so many exceptions that the only real exception is the initial idea. In all
> other programming languages that I know of, strings are quote delimited. A
> simple lesson learned once and applied all over the place.
>
are quotes required or not? *(yes/no)* Do quotes matte? *(yes)*
This is a case of falling back on well establish practices in coding here
are a set of examples
value='Foo' lets generalise to parname=value
If value is a single word not containing spaces or other delimiters
*parname=value* (no quotes)
If value is two words spaces *parname='value word2'* *parname="value
word2" **parname="""value word2""" *all work. note double "" does not.
Then as the documentation outlines, but is a logical necessity on almost
every computer on earth (this is my point, not intended as belittling)
- If you want to use a delimiter such as ' or " in a string you must use
the other
- If our value is parname="something "quote here" something else" it
does not know when it is starting or ending
- parname='something "quote here" something else' this works
- parname="something 'quote here' something else" as does this
- The advantage of the triple quotes is they rarely appear in content so
parname="""something 'quote here' and "here is another" something else"""
works and is the most reliable.
The above are the rules for literals, or fixed typed values.
- Tiddlywiki uses quotes for literals so if you put it around other
things '<<macroname>>' "<<macroname>>" """<<macroname>>""" it turns it
into a literal
- However when we use the following as a parameter or attribute value
they are already delimited by the << or {{ or {{{ so *no need to add
quotes and turn them into literals*.
- parname=<<macroname>>
- parname=<<varname>>
- parname={{{ [filter] }}}
- parname={{!!fieldname}}
- parname={{tiddlername}}
- parname={{tiddlername!!fieldname}}
- But in the above cases the value is retrieved from elsewhere, and that
value needs to be appropriate for the parameter you are providing.
- Keep in mind double and triple braces are used in wikitext because
html tags <div></div> etc... are permitted in wiki text, So we need << to
separate them from <
- only singles are required in filters because filters do not handle
html tags.
Bob can you review the following again to see if they are still issues in
my new version.
<issues>
> Your cheatsheet on the <VAR> element states
> "Does *only* work as a *filter variable*, inside or outside a macro:"
> As something is either inside or outside of a macro, this should always
> work as a filter variable then cause it can't be in any other state so the
> statement doesn't make sense.
>
I think this is gone and replaced
> Another example, concatenation of strings. Search for concatenate in TW
> documentation and you get the tiddler, Concatenating text and variables
> using macro substitution, which categorically states that the only way to
> do this is to use a macro. So I used a macro. Could not get the macro to
> function as expected inside a $list loop. You and Eric explained that it
> can not be used this was inside a $list loop but where does it state that
> in the documentation?
>
The section on *The value of Substitutions * kind of addresses how we use
macros to do concatenation, but the section on ❻ More on filtered
transclusions
>
> Many of the examples in the TW documentation use what appears to be a
> macrocall of some sort to perform the example. So you cannot see the actual
> statements used, you can only see the result of the macrocall. Not very
> helpful really is it. Why not just use simple statements that anyone can
> follow after all we are after a real example to see how things are done.
>
I agree this is not perfect, it was build to automate a large documentation
effort.
>
> As for referencing values inside tiddlers, it seems there are many
> possibilities involving various configurations of
> quotes/brackets/braces/underscores. Why is there not a single method of
> referencing content? Eric, in an earlier email, described it as the calling
> context's problem to work out what is required. Yet in all other
> programming languages that I have used over the 40+ years of my
> programming, referencing a variable is always the same in a particular
> language, it is not dependent on the calling content, nor is it dependent
> on how it is being used, it is defined in the grammar of the language. Now
> maybe this is an attribute of web applications. Maybe it is the result of
> organic development as Atro states. Whatever it is, it is bloody difficult
> to grasp and so becomes very frustrating.
>
This is still true in tiddlywiki but you are forced to use the appropriate
delimiters because we mix code with content such as wiki text. You may very
well see* "referencing a variable is always the same in a particular
language" *but I dispute this assertion, most languages have typing or
delimiter requirements as well.
>
> My development progress at this stage is a single wikitext statement at a
> time involving much input from the helpful people on this group.Each time,
> I learn a bit more but applying that learning quickly fails with the next
> statement.
>
Yes, if this is occurring we need our community to smooth the learning and
documentation.
>
> Your email to Atro and I asks, "perhaps you can't see the logic yet"
>
> Too right! I don't see any logic yet. I have studied your cheatsheet and
> the references it makes to others' work as well as various emails from Eric
> and the Tiddlywiki documentation and I still don't see any logic in it.
> Perusing the emails on this list indicates I am not the only one and there
> seems to be some recognition that this is a real problem for TW uptake.
>
I agree it may be a problem for uptake, we own this and we can/will remedy
it. However although it *may seem irrational, it is not, and It is almost
all logical to me now.* Personally I found my experience as coding in
procedural programming languages sometimes a barrier to some conceptual
leaps.
>
> Someone earlier suggested I contribute to the documentation but I don't
> understand enough to be able to do that. Any contribution I could make
> would, right now, be wrong, misleading and totally misunderstanding of the
> design philosophy behind TW.
>
> I am continuing to use TW for my web app but at some stage will have to
> make the decision as to whether it is worth my time and effort to continue.
> I feel TW has a great potential but believe the development side needs to
> be addressed.
>
> I am nearly 60% way through another TW app that simple involves my editing
> content and this is working well and is getting welcome acceptance.
> http://cultconv.com/English/Conversations/MacQueen_Mary/TiddlyWiki/index.html.
>
> FYI, for this application, I have created a Filemaker Pro database into
> which I type the various content elements and then generate the required
> Wikitext which I then cut and past into the appropriate tiddler. This has
> proved very efficient over typing directly into TW.
>
This can only be the case that you are more familiar with Filemaker Pro
database than tiddlywiki, it sounds like a wasteful procedure, but I
understand we use what we know.
>
> Hope this helps. Happy to discuss further and do what I can to address
> these concerns/issues.
>
> bobj
>
Thanks and lets move forward.
Tones
--
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/078f1988-f9d8-43a3-9faa-deac5da43964o%40googlegroups.com.
