I was going to try <iframe width="560" height="315" src="Webpages/{{!!
*caption*}}.html" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> because
Tiddlyclip already automatically creates a caption field for each tiddler
... and then I noticed that the title Tiddlyclip grabbed to put in the
caption field is *different* than the name the browser puts on the html
file of a webpage.
*Tiddlyclip automatic captioning:* Scientists’ Lab Creations Of Living
‘Model Embryos’ Raise Ethics Questions : The Daily Wire
*Desktop Firefox browser saves the webpage as:* Scientists’ Lab Creations
Of Living ‘Model Embryos’ Raise Ethics Questions | The Daily Wire.html
*Desktop Brave browser saves the webpage as:* Scientists’ Lab Creations Of
Living ‘Model Embryos’ Raise Ethics Questions _ The Daily Wire.html
Conclusion:
It would be hard for Tiddlyclip to automate this as everybody uses
different browsers.
*I *don't know how to tweak this to be automated even if I choose one
browser to stick with.
On Thursday, March 25, 2021 at 12:10:56 PM UTC+8 Sapphireslinger wrote:
> Woohoo! It works with plain html files. Closest I've been able to get to
> Evernote Web Clipper!
>
> If it is a true html file, and not just me deleting the first "m" out of
> the .mhtml file name, then both of these work:
>
> [ext[Open file|Webpages/foo.html]]
>
> <iframe width="560" height="315" src="Webpages/foo.html" frameborder="0"
> allowfullscreen></iframe>
>
> Thanks to https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/khBwYoy3Syg for that
> last.
>
>
> *1. But is it safer than pasting the raw html into a tiddler? Does it
> being embedded in an iframe somehow make it safer? (And is it
> non-bloating?)*
>
> *2. Can I modify Tiddlyclip to automatically include <iframe width="560"
> height="315" src="Webpages/{{!!Title}}.html" frameborder="0"
> allowfullscreen></iframe> in every tiddler Tiddlyclip creates? Is
> {{!!Title}} how it should be written?*
>
> 3. Do I really need the 560 and 315? I will try leaving them out.
>
> P.S. I can also see how .mhtml would have been the ultimate in formatting
> above even .html, because as I understand now, the .mhtml is a SINGLE FILE
> package of what used to be two separate things: the .html file with its
> ancillary media folder (i.e. what was created when a person used to click
> "save as complete webpage"). But until .mhtml embedding becomes possible,
> .html is already great.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 8:23:14 PM UTC+8 Sapphireslinger wrote:
>
>> Thank you Jeremy for looking into it!
>>
>> Tones, I started to look for an mhtml file to send, but choosing one has
>> me frozen for the present.
>>
>> Mark, I tried Copycat Markdown and it is a step up from plain text but
>> still looks messy, not the neat formatting of html. I will however use
>> markdown from now on instead of html since you confirmed the bloat and
>> insecurity. Now I just have to find all those bookmarks with html to delete.
>>
>> Thank you all for the info!
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 9:49:54 PM UTC+8 Mark S. wrote:
>>
>>> HTML has a lot of excess code. But if you're using copycat, you can copy
>>> the file contents as Markdown. The new markdown plugin updates allows some
>>> use of wikitext, so you can now have the best of both worlds. Markdown,
>>> like wikitext, is very lightweight, and you lose the incredible bloat of
>>> HTML -- and the dangers of hidden code.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 at 12:18:38 AM UTC-7 Sapphireslinger wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like to save my favorite web articles to my note-taking tiddlywiki.
>>>>
>>>> For plain text I love Tiddlyclip. But when I want to preserve the
>>>> formatting I also use the firefox extension Copycat to copy and paste the
>>>> html of a selection into the tiddler (and I worry about the safety of
>>>> pasting who-knows-what code into a tiddler - but this is a side question).
>>>>
>>>> However, recently I discovered that the Brave browser on my Android
>>>> mobile has a button to download a webpage as an .mhtml file.
>>>>
>>>> Could I treat the downloaded .mhtml files like my external img files
>>>> and just call for them like calling for an external img, for example
>>>> something similar to [img[foo.mhtml]] or [ext[Open
>>>> file|/foo/foo/foo.mhtml]]?
>>>>
>>>> That way the .mhtml files would be stored outside the tiddlywiki (no
>>>> bloat) and merely viewed when called for. Is there a way to do this? And
>>>> is
>>>> it safer?
>>>>
>>>> * I tried [ext[Open file|/foo/foo/foo.mhtml]] and it just opened a page
>>>> of code, no website. (I was trying to access a downloaded .mhtml file
>>>> using
>>>> Tiddlywiki on Firefox on my desktop computer running Linux Mint).
>>>>
>>>> * I tried renaming the link and the file to .html instead of .mhtml and
>>>> it just keeps "loading..."
>>>>
>>>> I tried opening the file directly on my computer (not going through
>>>> Tiddlywiki) by right-clicking on the file and choosing to open with
>>>> firefox, and it only works if the file extension has been changed to .html.
>>>>
>>>> I would be happy to hear what experiences people have had with .mhtml
>>>> files and Tiddlywiki.
>>>>
>>>
--
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/96a43f6c-864a-4232-9fb6-5bebb7751584n%40googlegroups.com.
