There was a message on the tiddlywiki Google groups today that resurrected an old post <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/OcOZ04M39XM/PgmKmDR9BwAJ> - that surprised me!
It referred to an extinct github issue #121 <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/121> which included THIS POST <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/121#issuecomment-249224265> : <$view field="…" format="wikified"> is no longer supported. It was an early > inconsistency that format="wikified" was a pseudonym for transclusion. > You'll notice that the remaining formats for the view widget all result in > a simple string being inserted into the widget tree, not a subtree, as > occurs with transclusion. > Ha! The *$view* widget used to have the *wikified* format! And the reason it no longer does so is explained! Now your earlier statement falls into place: To answer your original question, there is a big difference between the > view widget and the transclude widget. > > The view widget computes and renders a single string. The transclude > widget recursively renders the target tiddler. > > That means that the view widget is a single item as far as the refresh > mechanism is concerned. The results of the transclude widget, though, is a > complete render tree, which can be selectively refreshed. > The light finally shines! Would be great then to see if its safe to implement : https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/3843 : *Should the transclude widget treat empty text the same as missing text* Cheers! On Saturday, March 9, 2019 at 11:51:32 PM UTC+7, Jeremy Ruston wrote: > > Hi SS > > I made a GitHub issue to discuss the potential change to the transclude > widget: > > https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/3843 > > Best wishes > > Jeremy > > On 8 Mar 2019, at 09:53, S. S. <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > > At present: > > The *$transclude* widget treats any contained content as a fallback if > the target of the transclusion is not defined (ie *a missing tiddler or a > missing field*). > The content of the *$view* widget is displayed *if the field or property > is missing or empty*. > > It has been suggested to change the behaviour of the $transclude widget so > that: it will treat a blank string the same as a missing field. > > The reason is in this GitHub post by Jeremy and the comment preceeding it: > Table of Contents toc-caption macro awkward behaviour > <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/3624#issuecomment-469043311> > > I vaugely recall mentions being made on the tiddlywiki Google groups where > use is made of the difference in these two widgets to identify either an > *empty* value *or* a *missing* field. > > What might be the consequences of changing the behaviour of the > *$translcude* widget as suggested? > > > > > > > > On Saturday, February 9, 2019 at 5:41:32 PM UTC+7, S. S. wrote: >> >> Jeremy, >> >> You are right, the requested *wikified* format of the <$view> widget >> would not differ from the wikified behaviour of the <$transclude> widget. >> >> But I believe it would be an efficient way to take advantage of this >> difference shown below: >> >> The TranscludeWidget treats any contained content as a *fallback* if the >>> target of the transclusion is not defined (ie a missing tiddler or a >>> *missing *field). >>> >> >> The content of the <$view> widget is *displayed* if the field or >>> property is *missing* or *empty*. >>> >> >> The difference is that for the <$view> widget, the fallback content >> displays when the field is *empty*. >> >> The alternate would be to use a <$list> widget, which I believe is much >> less efficient to catch this scenario a few hundred times during a refresh >> (as >> mentioned by you on github >> <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/3624#issuecomment-444985661> >> : *We don't want to make the core toc-caption macro too complicated >> because it is typically rendered many times*.} >> >> It is similar to the way I think the below two are the same? >> >> <$text text={{!!caption}}/> >> >> <$view field="caption" format="text"/> >> >> I hope that explains *why* I am making this suggestion. >> >> Regards >> >> >> On Saturday, February 9, 2019 at 3:57:17 PM UTC+7, Jeremy Ruston wrote: >>> >>> Hi SS >>> >>> As mentioned above, the view and transclude widgets work in a totally >>> different way. Making the view widget behave like the transclude widget >>> doesn't make sense because it would *be* the transclude widget. >>> >>> The behaviour you describe is already available via the transclude >>> widget. So how would the behaviour of the proposed "wikified" format of the >>> view widget differ from the existing behaviour of the transclude widget? >>> >>> Best wishes >>> >>> Jeremy >>> >>> -- >>> Jeremy Ruston >>> [email protected] >>> https://jermolene.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] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/f21ad4a0-4ed4-4215-b10d-31112d5b9384%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/f21ad4a0-4ed4-4215-b10d-31112d5b9384%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/b6e51eee-f726-424c-90ce-9b08a0dd3cfa%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
