You are right! I overlooked that macrocall and <<...>> are not identical.
The documentation supports what you say under the "MacroCallWidget" tiddler:
*The advantage of the widget form is that it allows macro parameters to be
specified as widget attributes, thus allowing indirection and macro values
to be set*
Thanks again. The only thing that still seems weird about this form of
indirection is that now the field holds the index of the dataTiddler (or
dictionary), which just look like regular data. The {{}} transclusion
syntax was making it clearer in my mind that the content was derived from
elsewhere, maybe escaping it with "~" if what I really want is the text
with the actual curly braces.
Regards,
Robert
On Monday, September 22, 2014 2:26:46 AM UTC-4, Stephan Hradek wrote:
>
>
>
> Am Montag, 22. September 2014 06:10:42 UTC+2 schrieb rnaud:
>>
>> If you could still get to my questions about the $()$ syntax and the
>> non-cascading transclusion, it would help me understand why your code works
>> and mine does not.
>>
>
> The $(...)$ is used to transclude variables set wit <$set>. You can also
> use <<...>> instead, but I do not really understandd all of the
> implications. I simply stick to the rule: When I want something set with
> <$set> to be inserted, I use $(...)$.
>
>
--
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/d/optout.
