Yeah, the moment I want to get into more complicated columns and information, especially with on-going maintenance of record-esque tiddlers, I immediately go to HTML tables. So much easier.
Dinky short-term one-shots with two columns, at most four if they have very compact info, wikitext/markdown is good enough for quick and dirty and low-overhead; otherwise, YUCK. On Tuesday, October 13, 2020 at 10:13:47 AM UTC-3, Werner wrote: > > I found it easier resorting to plain HTML and using the CSS elements > provided by Mohammad's great SHIRAZ plugin. > > clutterstack schrieb am Dienstag, 13. Oktober 2020 um 02:04:06 UTC+2: > >> I like the marker idea, Charlie. Markdown tables (or wikitext tables) are >> such a pain to edit that I have been repeatedly quelling an urge to write >> separate tiddlers for each row of the one I'm writing (documenting for >> myself which macros do what, and where they live, in a personal plugin). >> It's so tempting in TW to write a "solution," thereby opening yet another >> set of parentheses before I finish the task at hand. Right now I'm jumping >> around between cells, so every time I look for my place I have to put down >> a new urge to institute a System. :) >> >> ...I actually broke down and wrote the tiddler to generate the table, and >> one single data-containing tiddler, just to scratch the itch, and went back >> to trying to maintain my discipline until the job is done. >> >> Tables are an annoyance in any Markdown environment, but TiddlyWiki is >> devilish in that you know you could write something on top of it to >> generate the table you're making, and organize the data while you're at >> it... >> >> On Saturday, October 10, 2020 at 1:23:38 PM UTC-4 Charlie Veniot wrote: >> >>> G'day, >>> >>> Normally I would entirely agree (I had also thought of using journals), >>> but in this particular case (for a multi-tracking thing for two power banks >>> and multiple tests), I wanted the one no fuss no muss tiddler with >>> everything "right there" so to speak. >>> >>> Sometimes, when wanting to just do something quickly, extra layers of >>> "fancy formality" overhead just gets in the way. >>> >>> I prefer keep that good stuff "fancy formality" for when it really >>> matters. >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, October 10, 2020 at 1:55:06 PM UTC-3, Atronoush wrote: >>>> >>>> Charlie, >>>> Creating long tables is error prone and boring when you come back to >>>> edit them. Why do not use a tiddler (look at tiddler philosophy)? >>>> In your case each row can be a tiddler. Every tiddler can have three >>>> fields: text field, time field and data field >>>> Then simply use TiddlyTables or Shiraz dynamic table to create such a >>>> long table. >>>> >>>> --Atro >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- 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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/94f850cf-3082-40c7-a4c0-3bb89aed7f04o%40googlegroups.com.
