Hi all, I've been rethinking how I should name tiddlers that represent sources, and I'm interested in hearing the thoughts of other TiddlyWiki users.
By sources I mean books, articles, movies etc. The crucial point here is that I am talking about things that have an 'official' name. Currently I use the 'official' title of the source, plus any extra information required to make it unique. For example: Books: The Fellowship of the Ring - J.R.R. Tolkien Movies: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) Articles: The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance (1993) In addition to this I might use a caption which displays a truncated version of the title when I cite the source in another tiddler, for example Ericsson-1993 or DeliberatePractice1993. I was browsing Soren's Zettelkasten <https://zettelkasten.sorenbjornstad.com/> and I noticed that he does things the opposite way around. He gives (usually) short CamelCase titles and relies on the caption field for the official name. I have been thinking about this and two possible advantages occur to me: - Shorter titles are quicker to type when linking from other tiddlers. - More importantly, perhaps they are easier to remember, or 'lock onto'? For example I will probably more easily be able to pull "DeliberatePractice1993" from my brain than I would "The Role of Deliberate Practice..." This relates to titles functioning like APIs <https://notes.andymatuschak.org/Evergreen_note_titles_are_like_APIs>. Possible disadvantages: - They are likely harder to generate automatically from source metadata. This may not be a disadvantage, as perhaps there is a benefit to thinking up titles yourself. - Even when coming up with titles yourself, it may be tricky to figure out a succinct way to represent sources with very long and complex titles, for example these scientific papers <https://www.natureindex.com/news-blog/five-most-popular-scientific-papers-of-january-twenty-twenty-altmetrics> . Anyway this is a fairly open ended post, but I'm wondering how people approach naming sources in TiddlyWiki? How do you name source tiddlers, and why? Do you prefer to use 'official' names or to come up with your own? Please be free to comment with any thoughts you have relating this topic, no matter how divergent! -- 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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/46b663d3-01b8-4abf-9e25-940dd681b466n%40googlegroups.com.
