On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 3:04:16 AM UTC+2, TonyM wrote: ... > This sounds interesting can you please clarify. Are you saying, Such > "field" definitions would make the content in the field pragma become a > value of this "Virtual Field". >
Not a "Virtual Field" a real field. The same as existing fields, but with the possibility to have line-breaks in the text. It would be the exact same behaviour as line-breaks in the text field. ... With some CSS magic, it would even display single line breaks. Which is already part of the core for plain text .. see: TW-Docs about hard linebreaks <https://tiddlywiki.com/#Hard%20Linebreaks%20with%20CSS%20-%20Example:%5B%5BHard%20Linebreaks%20with%20CSS%20-%20Example%5D%5D%20%5B%5BHard%20Linebreaks%20with%20CSS%5D%5D%20%5B%5BHow%20to%20apply%20custom%20styles%5D%5D> . > If I use edit-text I can name such fields and edit them as if they were > independent fields but I would only be editing part of the text field where > this definition resides? > That's right. If tiddler content is rendered, the \filed pragma will be "ignored". The tiddler-save action and several other widgets actions can modify the new fields. The core internal API may be the same, except of a new "multi-line" parameter for several widgets. With multi-line fields, it should also be possible to define field-types. eg: - \field my-text-field(type:text) -> default - \field my-date-field(type:date) or - \field my-currency-field(type:currency) or - ... you name it. This behaviour has been discussed some time ago. It would give as a lot of new possibilities for "input-validation" > > - If my above understanding is correct perhaps it would be misleading > to call them fields, although they will behave as such. > > I don't think so. They should exactly behave like fields, with some new functionality. > > - Perhaps they could be considered "sections" that are addressable > like fields. > > For me a "section" is a term, that was used in TWclassic for "heading-sections". Sadly ... This function didn't make it to TW5 :/ > > - Will they be able to be made global, or defined in a tiddler tagged > view template? > > They will be displaied with: - {{tiddlerName!!field-name}} .. Exactly the way you do it now. or - {{!!fieldName}} if you want to work with currentTiddler > > - Can we then display them conditionally? > > Yes with the reveal-widget. Same as you do with fields now. > If this interpretation that they are like sections is correct then it > could allow code modularisation within a Tiddler, such that sections of > code are defined at the top and included below in a structured form. > As shown in the OP \field my-field <-- Definition Paragraph 1 Paragraph 2 \end {{!!my-field}} <-- Usage This would be also easy to use with tables. eg: \field a1() Multi Line text Some more text \end | Cell | 1 | 2 | | a | {{!!a1}} | {{!!a2}} | The table will be simple copy paste action and the fields are convenient to be edited. .... > Thanks for your innovative thinking > You are welcome! In the future, it should be also possible to create a specialised EditTemplate, that works with a GUI for GUI type of users. ... But the first run could be text only mode, which should be much faster for experienced users. have fun! mario -- 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/cac88cae-2a2d-42d6-bc4b-864d1483b3b2%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
