Pff, no worries. It is very easy to call things by various "names", and for the "intent" of words to match exactly all of one's thoughts related to the words, while meaning something entirely different to somebody else.
So context gets jumbled easily. Imagine you place in all sorts of places all over the web a URL to a specific tiddler in one TiddlyWiki instance. So many things can happen to break all of those links. You might move the TiddlyWiki to a completely different host. You might actually rename the TiddlyWiki itself. So all kinds of worse problems than having the same URL suddenly pop open a few different unrelated tiddlers along with the intended one. That is barely a blip in the scheme of things. Easy enough to have some Tiddler in each TiddlyWiki that let's you know when you've imported some Tiddler that now has you with duplicate UID's. At which point, go to the imported tiddler and delete its UID, giving it a new one only if you really need to. If your workflow has you importing tiddlers incessantly between your TiddlyWikis, then you need to include in your workflow something that helps you with weeding your garden. Or prepare to have a more complicated system for uniquely identifying your tiddlers and having longer and more complicated URL's. I'm pretty sure somebody will come up with something much more perfect than what I've come up with, but there will be costs / trade-offs. Only you know what kind of trade-offs you can live with. (You won't know the trade-offs without trying the various possibilities.) For me, this UID-permalink thing (or whatever I finally call it), is the good enough lean/mean/simple/robust/no-break-anything-else solution for me. To each his/her own. On Sunday, May 9, 2021 at 1:48:33 PM UTC-3 ludwa6 wrote: > 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/ee99aa0e-3352-435a-b9c9-62786abd4b75n%40googlegroups.com.
