As far as I can tell, this topic has absolutely nothing to do with the “single tiddler mode” I was referring to in the original post. STM is about changing navigation behaviour to restrict the story river to contain a single tiddler.
This new topic appears to be about an enhanced permalink capability; it’s actually a pretty terrible idea to call it “single tiddler” anything because it’s really about “permaview” functionality: it’s incredibly useful to be able to link to multiple tiddlers at once. This is hot on the heels of a long discussion about how terrible we all find Google Groups. The thing is that keeping any discussion focussed and actionable takes a bit of self discipline. This topic is was originally a request for feedback about a new feature. Wilfully turning it into a discussion of something else makes everybody else reading this thread confused. By letting the mis-labelled discussion flourish here there’s a chance that we’ll end up persisting the confusion about what “single tiddler mode” means. Anyhow, I suggest that we close this topic, I’ll try to pull out any useful feedback about the work I’m doing into the GitHub ticket, and perhaps it’s worth starting a new thread to discuss this “barebones permaview" idea. Best wishes Jeremy. > On 27 Aug 2018, at 14:24, @TiddlyTweeter <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ciao Mat > > @TiddlyTweeter wrote: > I think performance is likely to be good. > > Mat repled ... > Well, the "performance" is to a great extent a result of the wiki ... > > Yes but. The assemblage of the sidebar is significant. Its not just size, its > complexity for render. Reducing all "cruft" I think will improve performance? > > And, why have it when you don't need it? > > I also find this concept very appealing... even if I must admit I'm not quite > sure what I'd do with them ;-) > > I think TonyM, or at least I, was pointing to Use Cases where the content of > the TW could contain disparate items AND gets focused on ONE at a time, > un-menued. > > An example could be a Newsletter. You only want the latest to show, or one > where a topic is directly addresses a raised issue. Listing them all would > more be a service for archivists than end-users, if you get what I mean? > > In short, many Use Cases, I think benefit from minimal delivery of "ALL BUT > ONLY" in one Tiddler/"Effective Page". > > Best wishes > Josiah > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki > <https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b7c0e225-c5ca-43a3-a972-1305d1f8c8a1%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b7c0e225-c5ca-43a3-a972-1305d1f8c8a1%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/C6E3106D-8736-4707-A840-D6EDAA657423%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
