Yeah I have also had this thought. When I use fields I always think of them
as "typed" links, but without the benefit of any textual context.
If I recall Roam Research has an "attributes" syntax, where something like
"attribute::Hello" will behave exactly like a link to "Hello". Presumably
they intend to add functionality that allows you to use attributes in the
kinds of ways that you suggest.
I don't actually do this, but I have considered writing links like
"participant::[[Alice]]" then using the search filter to get thinks like
backlinks. E.g:
<$vars search-term="participant::[[Alice]]">
{{{ [search<search-term>] -[<currentTiddler>]}}}
</$vars>
This could be turned into a more general macro of course.
I'm not sure how I feel about using the <$link> widget though. One of the
benefits of links over tags is that creating them is a natural part of the
writing process, and I think having to type out widget syntax every time
you created a link would undermine that.
On Saturday, 27 February 2021 at 19:32:13 UTC Soren Bjornstad wrote:
> Occasionally I find myself wishing I could include additional information
> with a link, often describing the exact relationship expressed by the link.
> A basic example would be, in a journal tiddler, I might link to a person
> and want to keep track of whether the person actually *participated* in
> the events being described, or was just *mentioned *in them.
>
> I imagine a syntax something like this:
>
> Mentioning [[Alice!mention]].
> Or [[a person|Alice!mention]].
>
> Another sensible choice could be to expose this functionality only through
> the <$link> widget, so that no new syntax would need to be introduced.
>
> You would then be able to filter on this metadata through a suffix of the
> links[] or backlinks[] operator, e.g., the filter
> "[[Alice]backlinks:mention[]]" could return only those links to Alice that
> are of the *mention* type. Perhaps something like
> "[linktype[LinkingTiddler],[Alice]]" to retrieve the type value as well
> (could have multiple values if there are multiple links of different types).
>
> I don't think there is anything you would be able to do with this that you
> can't do with fields, but I think in quite a few cases this would be a more
> convenient syntax. Another advantage in some cases is that the metadata
> would automatically come along with excisions and copy-paste.
>
> Does this sound interesting to anyone else? Practical?
>
--
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/44e16ea2-cba3-49bf-9805-35836574ad91n%40googlegroups.com.
