The ‘references’ drop down in a tiddler's toolbar shows titles of tiddlers which link to that tiddler. Would it be more accurate to refer to this collection of links as ‘referents’?
Doesn't "referent" denote the original entity, the passive thing which is being referenced (in contrast to the active thing which doing the referencing)? (<ESL disclaimer> - it's been a while since I've concerned myself with Saussure et al.)
I can see where you're coming from, as "references" is ambiguous at best here (since the direction is unclear), but don't regard it as a big issue.
Other Wikipedia uses 'What links here' , Wikispaces uses 'back links' : both these seem clunky and lack the charm TiddlyWiki exudes.
I believe "backlink" is now the generally accepted term for an inbound link. -- F. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
