Sorry Charlie for my sloppy wording: by "named-alike," what i meant was two tiddlers having the same UID-permalink. As for titles, i am very comfortable with the conflict avoidance measures built into the TW5 import process.
In any case, i am reassured by your answer(s- this last and the one above) that the risk involved in starting to use this thing -and then only for its intended purpose, as you say- is quite small. The biggest risk i see is the sort of confusion that might arise if i send somebody a link to something, and what they get instead is a page with an extra tiddler (or few -see below) that would tend to throw into question the relevance of that link that the web user trusted enough to follow -especially if the unintended tiddler(s) appear larger and/or louder, maybe higher on the page (? something i'll only learn thru experience; am comfortable w/ that). Still: i do suspect that i'm gonna somehow wind up with multiple tiddlers having the same number in that UID field, and that before very long i will wind up publishing some one(s) of those. I say this because of two fundamental dynamics in my workflow: 1. I've got a TiddlyDesktop full of different TW instances that are cross-pollinating tiddlers with such careless abandon as to cause me some concern; and 2. I'm a huge believer in DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself), so once i've written something somewhere that i want to share, i would much rather share a link to it than write it again. Can't say as (2) is much of a problem yet, because to this point i've got just a few small TW instances online -all of them tests, essentially, as i am still figuring out the best way to do this- but i do expect to be publishing & sharing real content in the very near future, at an ever-increasing rate of flow. For all that, i think it safe to say: we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 5:02:33 PM UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: > G'day Walt, > > I did not clue into your statement: "So, i have to ask: in case of UID > conflict: is what would happen indeed as innocuous a condition as what you > describe, i.e.: the two named-alike tiddlers would both display to the WWW > browser who comes in on that link? No other problem you can forsee arising > out of that?" > > "Named-alike" tiddlers. As in tiddlers with same title. When dragging > "Tiddler A" from one TiddlyWiki to another, you really have to pay > attention to the messages in the import mechanism. It says when you are > about to overwrite an existing tiddler. > > What you talk about here is not a problem UID-permalinks solve. That is a > much greater problem than the simple thing solved by UID-permalinks. To > reiterate: UID-permalink only keeps URL's to a specific tiddler from > totally breaking when tiddlers get renamed. > > Use UID-permalinks to keep URL's from breaking. This other problem > (uniqueness of tiddlers to prevent destruction of tiddlers upon import of > tiddlers from some other TiddlyWiki) is more inline, I think, with what > @PMario is looking into, which I personally think will involve a mess, > attempting to give every tiddler a cross-TiddlyWiki unique ID akin to IP > addresses or hardware-MAC-addresses > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAC_address>. Very bleurk and very > uninteresting to me. > > Other than something akin to IP/MAC addresses, you could make it such that > any TiddlyWiki can only be created from one centralized spot which > guarantees assigning every TiddlyWiki in existence a unique TiddlyWiki ID > then gets attached to every Tiddler in that TiddlyWiki. Infinity-bleurk. > > On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 11:26:13 AM UTC-3 ludwa6 wrote: > >> I understand, Charlie, how you are only trying to solve the problem w/in >> scope of a single wiki -and if that were a truly closed system, then indeed >> your solution solves the problem, if i'm understanding it correctly. >> >> However: i do see how easily tiddlers with the same ID could wind up in >> the same wiki in my case, where i've got a mitt-full of different editions >> that i am drag&dropping tiddlers across without due care, i suppose (mainly >> owing to that phenomenon Dave Gifford has described so well in his take on >> the "What is #TiddlyWiki" >> <https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/jIhG30rx1PU/m/153I2Xl7BQAJ> >> question. See: it's Silly-Putty, as i said :-). >> >> So, i have to ask: in case of UID conflict: is what would happen indeed >> as innocuous a condition as what you describe, i.e.: the two named-alike >> tiddlers would both display to the WWW browser who comes in on that link? >> No other problem you can forsee arising out of that? >> >> I do still think that the create date/time is sufficiently granular as to >> make the risk of similarly-coded tiddlers as near-zero as you could want, >> especially if combined with and/or hashed by some other factor. I gather >> that this doesn't work for those pesky "$:/" tiddlers -but that's fine, >> since we don't want it to (and there's no way such a thing could happen by >> accident, right?) >> >> /walt >> On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 2:59:14 PM UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: >> >>> It will always be unique within one TiddlyWiki. Same as "Sequence >>> numbers" in an Oracle Database. >>> >>> The UID isn't really a counter. It gets the the largest value of UID >>> that exists among the tiddlers, then gives "this tiddler" the greatest >>> value + 1. >>> >>> So not a counter in the sense of a stored value in some field. Maybe, >>> for performance, I'll have to set things up that way someday, but not for >>> now. >>> >>> That said, this is only about unique and stable permalinks for Tiddlers >>> in a TiddlyWiki, not about unique identification of tiddlers. >>> >>> If you wanted to, you could create a bunch of tiddlers, and copy-paste >>> the UID's among a bunch of them so that a UID permalink actually opens a >>> group of related tiddlers, if that's something someone wanted. >>> >>> To reiterate: The UID's are not about unique identifiers for tiddlers. >>> That's a different problem, but one that I don't think needs solving. >>> Well, until it ever bites me in the caboose. It hasn't yet, but my caboose >>> is polished and ready for the bite at any time. >>> >>> That aside ... >>> >>> Say we both have TiddlyWiki's that use this UID thing I've developed. >>> >>> And say I import one of your tiddlers into my TiddlyWiki, and I now have >>> two tiddlers that have UID values of 55. One of mine, and the one I >>> imported from your TiddlyWiki. >>> >>> Who cares? >>> >>> Every URL link out in the wild that references my TiddlyWiki with UID 55 >>> will now open with my tiddler and your tiddler. >>> >>> However, my original intent for the UID permalink is not borked. We can >>> still easily get to my tiddler. >>> >>> If your tiddler (UID=55) gets to be a real pain, then I'll strip the UID >>> off of your tiddler that is in my TiddlyWiki. >>> >>> Anyway, all of that said, this UID-permalink thing does what it is >>> supposed to do in the problem scope I'm thinking, but is in no means meant >>> to solve the problem scope of unique identifiers for all the tiddlers in >>> the world. That is not a problem I am interested in at all. >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 10:43:06 AM UTC-3 PMario wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> TLDR; I think a "counter" used as UID will fail in the short run! >>>> >>>> I did my post my concerns at github. >>>> https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/discussions/5668#discussioncomment-715278 >>>> >>>> -mario >>>> >>> -- 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/35fe13a4-c92f-44a9-b8f1-008ec3c676e8n%40googlegroups.com.
