Hi Mat I think we're recursing in circles. Your trying to make the case for a unit of content that is smaller than a tiddler. I'm responding with the suggestion that we instead introduce a new concept of a "document" (say) that is a sequence of tiddlers and is displayed analogously to a tiddler today. A document would, of course, itself be implemented as a tiddler that references it's constituent tiddlers.
I believe that these two models are equivalent. The difference is that aggregating tiddlers goes with the grain of how TiddlyWiki is designed while splitting tiddlers into smaller entities requires TiddlyWiki to be re-architected. Best wishes Jeremy. On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Mat <[email protected]> wrote: > @Jeremy - thank you for your reply. > > Ok, I had not quite understood this was the same as the issue with > sections/slices. I particularly got excited from noting that adding a link > as described (a href + a id) does succeed in jumping. > > But, ok, it's the frequently recurring section/slices issue. We need to > solve this as there clearly is a need for it. I like your joining idea and > have thought a bit on how it might be interfaced. > @anyone - a simple mockup: > > > > <https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-_5bUYW1Z2nk/VTfEgAKbvKI/AAAAAAAARRY/jMVJNLtSQ5w/s1600/MergeTiddlers.png> > > I imagine it as a popup accessed via the tiddler toolbar. For example one > might want to "*Append* current tiddler to the one *above* and set > current title as *h2* heading". > > I know terms "above/below" sound funny but "preceeding/succeeding" is > ambiguous because of different story views. Above/below is strictly about > location whereas terms preceeding/succeeding has an element of time in > them. (...um, did someone just shout *neeeerd*?) > > <titles list> is a search field. Maybe this is not possible inside a > dropdown and it must really be two widgets? > > > Ideally there is *also a global merge/compound feature* from e.g the > document toolbar, allowing you to select e.g "all open tiddlers" or > filter. > > Obviously, if the tiddler head is hidden one also has to solve how to > dis-compound without that tiddlers toolbar visible. One idea could be an > check-box list in the top tiddlers head, aggregating the compounded titles. > It would probably have much in common with a Table of Contents for multiple > compound tiddlers anyway so I'd think it's a reusable thing.... > > > @Jeremy > > I've found the current lack for procedure to include sections has the > exact opposite effect on my work from what I must assume is the purpose, > i.e that of reusing tiddlers to avoid redundancy. Currently, I'm instead > forced to *copy* sections of interest from other tiddlers. I thought > about why this happens and realize that the whole concept of a tiddler is > ambiguous because, as it turns out, what is a "smallest semantically > meaningful chunk" depends on context! For example, the sentence "To be or > not to be, that is the question" is an integral part in its original > context, but as a quote it has a totally different context and must > typically be cut out. > > An area of particular concern for this issue is the coming Federation! As > far as I understand, one primary idea there is to be able to re-use > content. A different context from the original will likely be the norm ( - > little point in mere repetition) so tools to slice out stuff will be much > needed... and, ideally, slices smaller than an actual tiddler. > > Here follow some pie-in-the-sky ideas on approaches for including sections > in a Federated context, mostly to provoke thoughts on what needs we will > actually have when we Federate so we don't lock ourselves in by choosing > limited implementation strategies at an early stage: > > Ok, one idea might be to remotely transclude (or whatever the technique is > for inclusion) the whole tiddler and then to *locally* hide parts of it. > > Another idea might be to, pre-inclusion, introduce "counting" to specify > desired parts to include (...perhaps taking advantage of the nodejs row > counting feature somehow?) tiddler#r3:8@wiki or "p" for paragraphs, etc. > If this is not possible pre-inclusion, then maybe this is how "hiding parts > in imported local tiddlers", as per previous suggestion, could be achieved. > > A probably better idea would be some kind of anchors that are > automatically inserted, in the transclusion process, from various triggers, > such as "paragraph start", macro calls, etc. Maybe that same kind of anchor > could *also* be manually inserted. > > <:-) > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAPKKYJYeD4M2B1fRZaQUgmi4BNHi6i%3DkA-rAeW4nyiFU9JZ0Fg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
