The beauty of your link is that it is obvious what the link is for. That really is a great thing. Which I know I would eventually break because I am always slightly tweaking everything towards titles/names/descriptions that better fit changing scope/circumstances/you-name-it.
With a wee number, I'll never monkey around with it.. Which is the safety net I'm looking for: something stable that I know I will never tweak, tweaking being my nature when it comes to text. I'm just as likely to change a description (scope of tiddler may have changed), or improved the wording or something. I'm pretty stuck in a method similar to the Oracle Sequence Numbers I'm familiar with. I've always been more comfortable with identifiers never based on real-world values. On Monday, May 10, 2021 at 11:17:22 PM UTC-3 TW Tones wrote: > Try this; > > https://tiddlywiki.com/#:[description[Browser extension for Firefox]] > > If you could rename and save this tiddler, it will still work until you > modify the description or clone the tiddler. > > Eureka! > > I think I have finally come up with a simple, total, robust solution to > permalinks, serial number, UID and GUID's not to put it in words and a > plugin. > > I can write the specification if anyone wants to help, otherwise it will > take a little longer > > Regards > Tones > > On Monday, 10 May 2021 at 03:07:28 UTC+10 [email protected] wrote: > >> 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/c0ebee3e-a821-416a-83c8-31e3a336da48n%40googlegroups.com.
