Hi everyone, I am a bit confused about all this.
Right now, all I see are loads of options to define stuff and seemingly too few standards. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy flexibility. But what I don't see is users going about to define custom linkimage macros. o.O As for the OP, I certainly don't see how transclusion caters as the standard way of rendering images. At some point your markup or tiddlers need to say "this is an image" and be able to parse some url in one way or another. I certainly don't want or need extra tiddlers for every image that I want to display. All I want is good ol' image markup. If using enhanced image features means to rather employ an enhanced image macro, fine. But the basic stuff, including placement, css-class and size should be core markup, not some macro that extends on that. What I find more important than what is being used in terms of markup is the ability to have a globally defined path to some image or file host and then be able to reference that in the urls for the resources I want to pull, e.g. <img src="img:folder/image.jpg"> Whereas the renderer is smart enough to replace 'img:' with a a globally defined variable of sorts. Cheers, Tobias. On Friday, 28 June 2013 16:42:58 UTC+2, Jeremy Ruston wrote: > > Try this: > > \define linkimage(title,url) > <$link to="$title$"><img src="$url$"></$link> > > \end > > Here is an image: <<linkimage MyTiddler " > http://orbit/livelink/llisapi.dll/open/5270759";>> > > Best wishes > > Jeremy > > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Iskie Isketerol > <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> Here's what I tried, using your example >> >> \define linkimage(title,url) >> <$link to="$title$"><img >> src="$http:\\orbit/livelink/llisapi.dll/open/5270759$"></$link> >> >> \end >> >> Here is an image: <<linkimage MyTiddler myimage.jpeg>> >> >> >> Nothing displayed - I should have seen the JPG image which the URL >> referenced. Am I missing something obvious? >> >> *kjc* >> >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 7:38:36 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Ruston wrote: >> >>> It seems that it;s still not possible to display images from an >>>> http:// reference as it was in the previous TiddlyWIKI. >>>> >>> >>> That is correct - as things stand, it is only possible to display >>> external images via an inline <img src="blah"> tag. I have thought that the >>> old [img[URL]] syntax could be re-introduced as a shortcut for the <img> >>> tag. >>> >>> >>>> I have been rolling out a solution based on use of "img" links and was >>>> hoping to how how much nicer TiddyWIKI5 is to look at. We keep a load of >>>> screenshots as files on a external system - without these links working my >>>> solution does not either. >>>> >>> >>> You can use image links in TW5 like this: >>> >>> <$link to="TiddlerTitle"><img src="myimage.jpeg></$link> >>> >>> It can be simplified by using a macro definition at the top of a >>> tiddler. For example: >>> >>> \define linkimage(title,url) >>> <$link to="$title$"><img src="$url$"></$link> >>> \end >>> >>> Here is an image: <<linkimage MyTiddler myimage.jpeg>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Any chance that you're secretly holding back this feature? >>>> >>> >>> Ha! I'm just a poor documentarian. >>> >>> Best wishes >>> >>> Jeremy >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> kjc >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2012 7:34:17 PM UTC-4, PMario wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 30, 11:33 pm, John Hind <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> > However there is now way to much redundancy for my taste. All the >>>>> following >>>>> > seem to be equivalent: >>>>> > >>>>> > 1. ((Motovun Jack.jpg)) >>>>> @jeremy >>>>> I'm not 100% sure, but I think, the ((...)) starts it's live as a >>>>> replacement for the <<inclusion ...>> macro, that was used inside >>>>> template tiddlers. It just did include text from a tiddler, without >>>>> any <div> or <span> wrapper into the template. right? >>>>> So the usecase is totally different to a <<tiddler>> transclusion. >>>>> >>>>> > 4. <<image [[Motovun Jack.jpg]]>> >>>>> > 5. <<tiddler [[Motovun Jack.jpg]]>> >>>>> For me this are 2 totally different macros. That both of them display >>>>> the x.jpg tiddler as a picture is a coincidence. If I change the >>>>> "type" field of x.jpg to "text/plain" I want <<tiddler [[Motovun >>>>> Jack.jpg]] "className">> to display the tiddler content as text. With >>>>> jpg, it would only make sense for debugging but anyway. With svg it >>>>> makes sense ..... >>>>> >>>>> <<image [[anypic]] width:111 height:111 other image specific params to >>>>> come >> ... should display a tiddlers content as a picture, no matter >>>>> what type the tiddler is. >>>>> >>>>> -m >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to tiddlywikide...@**googlegroups.com. >>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]**. >>>> Visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/**group/tiddlywikidev<http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev> >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/**groups/opt_out<https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out> >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jeremy Ruston >>> mailto:[email protected] >>> >> > > > -- > Jeremy Ruston > mailto:[email protected] <javascript:> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" 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/tiddlywikidev. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
