Hi Hans Fascinating way of looking at things, and, yes, I think it fits nicely with the direction under discussion for tagging. I'm hoping that we can also emulate Ted Nelson's ZZ structure with it by treating tags as what he calls "dimensions".
I love the idea of using base 2.2e9 numbers encoded in UCS, by the way, lovely - do let me encourage you to post interesting source links. Best wishes Jeremy On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 12:47 PM, HansWobbe <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jeremy ... > > Both the generalization of "list of tiddlers" and the side effect of > "ordering of the tags would be properly maintained" would provide major > benefits to me since I make extensive use of tags. In fact, if you think > of tag values as "symbols" and their order is maintained, then it's > possible to create a "positional notation" in which each position acts as > an orthogonal dimension. The end effect is that it would be possible use a > single symbolic tag value that precisely positions the objects so tagged in > a sparse (associative) "N dimensional array". > > To understand this it may help to start by thinking of 234 as ... = 2x10*2 > + 3x10*1 + 4x10*0 ... = the cell that is in the second plane, 3rd row, 4th > column. > Then, its possible to generalize this by realizing that there is no need > to limit it to just using base 10. Wikipedia's mathematicians refer to > "mixed radix positional notation"(s). For example, Canadian postal codes > are a 6 character ANA-NAN pattern in which my postal code of M1C 3L3 > expands to > 13x26^5 + 1x10^4 + 3x26^3 + 3x10^2 + 12x26^1 + 3x10^0 > > Going further, there is no need to be limited to just using Alphabetic > letters and Numeric digits. If we take advantage of the UTF-8 encoding > range, then the UCS (Universal Character Set) provides an "alphabet" of > about 2.2e9 letters. Thos makes it possible to. for example, provide a > unique 2 character symbol for each of the planets 7,000,000,000 inhabitants > with lots of address space "room" left over! > > If anyone is interested, I can add reference links to the main supporting > source pages at wikipedia. > > Cheers, > Hans > > > > On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:32:27 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Ruston wrote: >> >> >> With respect to the comments about handling multiple tag fields, I'm >> increasingly interested in the idea of generalising "list of tiddlers" as a >> field type; the tags field would then just be an instance of that field >> type. So you'd be able to create many different fields each of the type >> "list of tiddlers". This idea also fits in nicely with the work I've been >> doing on D3 integration: in D3 the fundamental datatype is the list (or >> array). This would allow us to model a table as a list of lists, which >> would fit very naturally. >> >> A potential side effect of the change is that the ordering of the tags >> applied to a tiddler would be properly retained, allowing users to reorder >> tags to convey their relative importance. >> >> Does that make sense? >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jeremy >> >> -- Jeremy Ruston mailto:[email protected] -- 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
