Hi Tobias, I'm referring to the "Externalising Image Tiddlers" section of the "ExternalImages" tiddler on tiddlywiki.com. It tells you how to "export" (externalize) images from TW, and how to reset the _canonical_uri field to the new directory of the external images. As part of process, you specify a filter *[is[image]]*. If you follow the directions as written, ALL images will have their _canonical_uri field overwritten, even if they have some custom path (to an image file outside that of the externalized images, or maybe even a web site). So you need a more complicated filter than [is[image]] and/or a way to mark those image tiddlers whose _canonical_uri paths should not be rewritten. I was suggesting an additional field (flag field) to separate image tiddlers that can have their _canonical_uri fields overwritten by the externalizing and those that can not.
HTH Mark On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 2:03:50 AM UTC-7, Tobias Beer wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > Thanks for those very important details, > > >> if some of the _canonical_uri's tiddlers already have a custom path >> inside the existing file structure they will be overwritten by the >> externalizing process. In that case, you might need to set up an additional >> flag field and filter to prevent those custom tiddlers from being >> over-written. >> > > I have trouble understanding what you mean by this... > > 1. What is the "externalizing process"? > 2. What gets overwritten doing what exactly? > 3. How and when and where use a "flag field / filter"? > > For these reasons, it might be preferable to abandon _canonical_uri >> entirely and display images via a global macro. The macro would provide the >> path infrastructure and could be quickly changed depending on how the TW is >> being used (stand-alone, local server, remote server). Different macros >> could be used for custom images outside the standard file paths. >> > > I very much agree, which is why there already is this: > > ximg @ tb5 <http://tobibeer.github.io/tb5/#ximg> > > The current `_canonical_uri` method appears a bit problematic in more than > one way, > starting with the naming convention for that field. > Perhaps it's not the worst idea to deprecate this field and how it works > today. > > Best wishes, > > — tb > -- 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/5b6ef35c-9ea3-4261-a2ac-94d4d318ff21%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
