On Thu, 10 Apr 2014, Jeremy Ruston wrote:
Just to be clear, this issue is independent? I mean, if we fixed the
PUTting and GETting content-type TiddlyWiki could continue to use tiddlers
with the type field set to "application/json" without any limitations or
peculiarities? Meaning that this is a local issue around TW5's handling of
JSON?
Yes, that's why I keep saying there are two separate issues.
Anyhow, I think the fact that the first JSON tiddler you saw happened to be
a bundle of tiddlers is perhaps a red herring. TiddlyWiki5 has JSON
tiddlers as first class citizens, and they are used for all kinds of
purposes by the core, and can be freely employed by users too. The role of
a JSON tiddler is determined by its fields (typically tags, but it could be
any criteria), just as the role of a wikitext tiddler is determined by its
fields rather than a subtype of wikitext.
I guess what I'm trying to say that those tiddlers, in contexts
other than TW5, will be easier to make do "special" things if those
doings are dispatched via one aspect: their type.
This is already true of tiddlers which are text: we know that a
tiddler of text/x-tiddlywiki should be rendered and rendered as
tiddlywiki clasic; we know that a tiddler of text/x-markdown should
be rendered and rendered as markdown; etc. This is despite the fact
that what those tiddlers really are is text/plain.
You could make a very similar argument for various structures of
JSON.
Like I've said before, considering this as a change is entirely
up to you. The reason I keep mentioning it is because I want to be
sure that tiddlers are capable (by whatever definition) in lots of
different contexts. Have a single mode of dispatch makes that
easier.
If you have some which are special rather than generic, it would make
sense to signify that now rather than later. Doing it now would avoid
needing to make the kind of abrupt (and biggish) change that the _other_
issue is bringing to TiddlyWeb.
Some of them are raw JSON of a form that TW5 doesn't know what to do with
There aren't any JSON tiddlers that TW5 doesn't know what to do with; it
has features to enable it to deal with any arbitrary JSON in tiddlers (I
plan more, such as a hierarchical JSON editor).
But TiddlyWeb, for example, not only doesn't know what to do with
them but also would struggle to add code to do interesting things
with them if it has to do dispatch in a variety of ways.
Does that help to clarify it a bit? I'm trying to make the tiddlers
more portable. The bug you identified in TiddlyWeb demonstrated that
TiddlyWeb was working against that portability. I want to be sure
that TW5 doesn't work against it too.
--
Chris Dent http://burningchrome.com/
[...]
--
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/d/optout.
