Hi Jed, Think "logs", "comments"... all those kinds of things. > > > Is that different from just using fields? >
Yes and no. A tiddler may have a number of comments or logs attached to it. Implementing that as a number of comment-fields seems difficult and error prone. > Fields may get very cluttered I guess, but having a connected data tiddler > or something would be equivalent to just using a data tiddler in addition > to the original one wouldn't it? > That data tiddler would have to be stuffed into the system tiddler namespace. So, that is one option. Personally, I prefer to keep data at the place to which they pertain, that very tiddler. Other than not wanting to implement that functionality, I don't see why a tiddler itself should not contain complex data anywhere but its body. Whether or not they're easily editable within the current editors is a matter of having accessible editors. > I would think that for logs and the like having the tiddler foo and then > storing logs in $:/data/foo/logs and comments in $:/data/foo/comments or > some similar setup would be less cluttered than having the information > stored in the tiddler foo itself. > What about comments for *$:/foo*, or even *$:/data/foo*? I think the complexity gets arbitrarily confusing. I think it is way more natural to simply pack those things into the very tiddler to which they belong. Two different modeling approaches. I don' see a tiddler getting "cluttered" by that, especially nto with tiddler fields being only editable as simple text-inputs. > I think that would make it easier to search and use things like display > templates for the data. This would be even better if the system tiddler > browser gets implemented ( > http://tiddlywiki.com/prerelease/#%24%3A%2Fcore%2Fui%2FMoreSideBar%2FExplore > ). > I think having comments stored at tiddler-data-fields is by far easier index, search and relate to that very tiddler... using standard filtering procedures, if not a lot easier, than putting these things under some deferred system-namespace. What about renaming a tiddler and similar things? Store fields where they belong, as much as you can. A tiddler is a moveable entity... and should pack with all the things that go with it, is what I think. But, above all, I see no particular reason why only the text field of a tiddler should be indexable via json. Would there be a technical constraint to doing so? Best wishes, Tobias. -- 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.
