Ciao reinhard, Nice post! To get to the grist...
reinhard: "there is never a doubt which tiddler is which" Ah! There is! In your own OP you sensibly want to differentiate "der" from "dee". My concern is for the Virgin User who likely has no idea what *recursion* is; how would they know an "er" from an "ee"? *Broadly, in documents, how do we explain complex nested transclusion to neophytes?* This is just a thought. Overall I like where you coming from. Best, TT On Sunday, 16 January 2022 at 11:56:49 UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: > @TiddlyTweeter > > *"No, it wouldn't.* The residual issue is* positional reference. *A* > transcluder *is* relative *to a *transcludee.* > > Yes, of course. That' the whole crux of the matter. Any tiddler can take > on both the role of a transcluder and a transcludee. It depends on the > context. But given two tiddlers with a transclusion relationship there is > never a doubt which tiddler is which. > "Without positional referencing you would not know what is transcluded > from what is transcluding." > > Its not the concern of the *transcluder* if the *transcludee* produces > its content by nested transclusions or not. So positional referencing is > not needed. > > "FYI, I think your basic split in terms is useful, but you'll need a *third > term* too to help *explicate nesting*." > > Why? We say transclusions are *nested*, if a *transcludee* (a transcluded > tiddler) in turn transcludes another tiddler and so takes on the role of a > *trancluder* relative to this thidd tiddler. > > On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 11:36:55 AM UTC+1 Reinhard Engel wrote: > >> @Mat >> >> Never mind! >> >> Just image you always have to say "the employing person" vs "the employed >> person". Anyway, I wanted to add some information about transclusions into >> my wiki and looked for some suitable tiddler titles. >> *TheTranscludingTiddler* and *TheTranscludedTiddler* seemed to >> cumbersome. So I chose the suggested terms. They work for me, and I thought >> they might be useful in general. >> >> Thanks for your remarks! >> >> -Reinhard >> >> On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 11:21:10 AM UTC+1 Reinhard Engel wrote: >> >>> @TiddlyTweeter >>> >>> You wrote: >>> >>> "Part of the issue* though* is that in TW "transclusion" is potentially >>> *radical*. Transclusions can be nested infinitely. So, in that context, >>> the terms "Transcluder" / "Transcludee" would not be so transparent in >>> actual use" >>> >>> If transclusions are nested, each intermediate tiddler takes on both the >>> roles *transcludee* and *transcluder*. >>> The relationship is between the transcluder and the transcludee is >>> strictly binary. The transcluder doesn't and shouldn't care about how the >>> transcludee produces its content. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- 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/dae10754-c6d2-4689-aca5-e70dae3bd026n%40googlegroups.com.
