Do you

1) Put all your tiddlers in one name space (ie one TW)
2) Put them into different namespaces (one TW per project)

Tiddlers should be small (in order to make them reusable)
If they are (say) on average c. 300 bytes
we could get 3 tiddlers per KB of 3K tiddlers / MB
or 3M tiddlers per GB

So size isn't a problem - is performance a problem (when searching etc)

Is choosing the name of a tiddler a problem at scale a problem?
(I have elsewhere argued that naming is difficult)

If we imported large numbers of tiddlers with the same name
could we make a disambiguating mechanism (like the wikipedia)
ie X might mean A B C and let the user decide

I think all tiddlers in one namespace might be overkill.

(counter argument - a dictionary has a flat structure and thousands of 
words in it)

How about *two* levels of naming for example joe@TiddlerName

(( and please NOT multiple levels joe@stockholm@sweden - I hate these))

and an import declaration (see joe & fred)
which exposes the joe and fred namespaces

I'm thinking out loud here - just wondering about names.

Actually sticking everything in one directory make life easy since you don't
have to worry about which directory to put things in - two levels
make life far more difficult - but if the top level is the author then
the decision problem (as I call it) (ie choosing which directory to store a 
file in)
is solved! 

Any other distinction (say by project) is tricky - ie X could belong to 
project A or B
or both - so where do we store it???


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 post to this group, send email to
Visit this group at
To view this discussion on the web visit
For more options, visit

Reply via email to