Re: [tw5] Re: Discussion: Tiddler titles for sources

[Si Si]

@Springer

On the other hand, if you like using the off-the-shelf sidebar search
> function (as I do, especially if I publish for students), that may give you
> a reason to stick with a longer concatenation: if the title field holds 
> *Beauvoir,
> Ethics of Ambiguity (1962)* you can always easily find it even if you
> only remember that the source has "ambiguity" in it. ;)


I didn't actually think of that, definitely an advantage of using full
names.

I've recently gravitated toward approaching the title field with
> author-date brevity, as is used in interlinear citation: *Beauvoir 1962*


This definitely has advantages in terms of brevity, but my intuition is
that I would find only including the author's name more difficult to
remember.

 *but* I have the freedom to custom-abbreviate titles that are
> inconveniently long.


I think I am leaning towards taking a similar approach, but with the main
titles rather than captions. Something like *Ethics of Ambiguity* is short
and easy to remember, but something like *Genome-wide CRISPR–Cas9 screening
reveals ubiquitous T cell cancer targeting... *is going to be much easier
to manipulate in your mind if you come up with a new label for it.

@TiddlyTweater

I am not fully sure this a TW issue, so much as a WHAT IS MY CITATION
> scheme? issue :-)


Not quite. It's more about labels than citations. I'm interested in what is
a good way to label sources so that I can most easily manipulate them in my
thinking. Again this all goes back to "Idea APIs".

@Charlie

If you do want something to make it easy to find titles while creating
> links, you might find the Edit-CompText
>  plugin really helpful.


Thanks, I already use this plugin!

I would say that the titles for me are less about being easy to find with
TW tools, and more about making sources easy to think about and pull out of
my brain, if that makes any sense. Hence why I'm questioning whether using
the 'official' name is necessarily always the best option.

I don't know for sure, but I just have a suspicion that shorter names make
sources easier to think about as concepts/ideas. In conversation people
often shorten the names of things when discussing them (e.g. "Empire" and
"Jedi" for Star Wars 2 + 3) and obviously this just saves time, but I think
there may be cognitive benefits of compressing names in this way when
discussing sources.

On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 at 01:09, Charlie Veniot  wrote:

>
>
> On Monday, June 28, 2021 at 1:51:05 PM UTC-3 Si wrote:
>
>>
>> I have been thinking about this and two possible advantages occur to me:
>>
>>- Shorter titles are quicker to type when linking from other tiddlers.
>>- More importantly, perhaps they are easier to remember, or 'lock
>>onto'? For example I will probably more easily be able to pull
>>"DeliberatePractice1993" from my brain than I would "The Role of 
>> Deliberate
>>Practice..." This relates to titles functioning like APIs
>>.
>>
>>
>>
> If you do want something to make it easy to find titles while creating
> links, you might find the Edit-CompText
>  plugin really helpful.
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/gzLJNKuLRPM/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/17bcc5ee-42a2-4010-86b8-470761b64e69n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAKKx7WaZXC_T_CgRx-m_KtJYPxR%2Bo75XVw8JvD%2B8uTf9HPN84g%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tw5] Re: [UPDATE] uni-link pugin V2.1.0 released

[Si Si]

Hi Mario, thanks for the response.

There is a little work around, that looks a bit strange. eg: I found some
> [[book|??]]s.   So the link will only cover the book text. I know that's
> not pretty but it creates valid sentences.


Thanks, this is probably the best workaround.

The question is interesting and valid, and it seems to be an easy change.
> .. But due to its language specific nature, it isn't. Implementing it will
> probably double the actual complexity of the plugin.


Of course - I was not expecting there to be an easy way to build this into
the plugin. I just wondered if there was an easy way to hack it.

Having said that, I did have an idea. Not sure if it makes sense or not,
but I'll put it out there: You could allow users to add an optional filter
expression to be applied to the search term before it is used.

For example take [[books|??]]. By default this will work as it currently
does, but from a global config the user could add the filter trim:suffix[s].
This would be applied to [[books]] and then the result used as the search
term.

Although I think this would largely solve my problem, I'm not sure how
useful it would be in general, but I thought I'd put it out there.

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 07:37, PMario  wrote:

> On Sunday, June 27, 2021 at 10:58:41 PM UTC+2 Si wrote:
> ...
>
>> I only just noticed your Uni-link Search feature! Very handy -  I have
>> been frequently writing things like [[really good idea|Really Good Ideas]],
>> so this will save me a lot of time.
>>
>
> There is a little work around, that looks a bit strange. eg: I found some
> [[book|??]]s.   So the link will only cover the book text. I know that's
> not pretty but it creates valid sentences.
>
> The second workflow that works immediately is: *using aliases* eg: The
> "Books" tiddler gets 2 of them "book" and "books" may be [[new books]] and
> so on  Use *[[book|?]] or [[books|?]]* problem solved.
>
>
>> I have a question however: Is there any way to customise exactly how the
>> search is applied?
>>
>
> At the moment - no. ... The function is executed directly in javascript.
>
>
>> I'm wondering if there is a way to use Uni-link search, but tweak it so
>> it will ignore the final "s"? So [[books|??]] would automatically link to
>> [[Book]].
>>
>
> The main problem is, that singular / plural rules depend on the language.
> book - books in German is Buch - Bücher
> So a hardcoded rule won't help the plugin.
>
> The second problem is, that it has to work in both directions. So imo a
> link like [[books|??]] needs to search for "book" and "books"  ...
> [[book|??]] has to do the same thing. ... This will make the search
> function 50% slower :/
>
> It would be possible to implement "plural" / "singular" filter rules. But
> they will be language specific. Some 3rd party libraries will be needed. So
> there would be an additional plugin per language.
>
> UNI-LINK alias already uses macros instead of hardcoded links. ... but at
> the moment link-search outputs a "link", so the built-in "backlinks"
> handling works. If link-search would output a macro, a new "backlinks"
> handling will be needed. :/  I know how to do it, but it would add extra
> complexity.
>
> The re-link plugin is very popular and I try to keep uni-link compatible
> with it. IMO the singular / plural links will definitely be out of the
> scope, what re-link should handle. ...
>
> The question is interesting and valid, and it seems to be an easy change.
> .. But due to its language specific nature, it isn't. Implementing it will
> probably double the actual complexity of the plugin.
>
> So all in all using aliases instead of link-search will win in terms of
> simplicity. .. And aliases don't need language specific plugins ..
>
> hope that helps
> mario
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/35_6ltCXEvs/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a68737d8-c2ab-457d-91c8-d0942d696133n%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAKKx7WYXyz8YA3JZeZt5%3DwRnPhh-JWeybSAZYGqRVmEWxvsxxA%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tw5] NoteTaking in Streams

[Si Si]

Whoops, sent the previous message before finishing it:


> That is definitely a nice idea. I wonder if we might take it a step
> further and just drop the last word (which may be incomplete). This is
> untested:

 <$text text={{{
> [length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
> ~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]search-replace:g:regexp[(.*)\s(\w+)$],[$1]]
> }}}/>
> What do you think?


I did consider this, but I'm actually not sure which way looks better. I
don't think that cutting off an incomplete word half way through looks bad,
and I might even prefer it, though I couldn't say why. Possibly just
because that's what windows explorer does so I'm just used to it.

On Sun, 27 Jun 2021 at 20:59, Si Si  wrote:

> Saq,
>
> I've also been considering asking for volunteers for a small group of
>> regular users of Streams for testing new features..
>
>
> I'm happy to test stuff out as required.
>
>
>> from my perspective however how, much effort I put into adding new
>> features to Streams is highly dependent on how many people regularly use it
>> and find that it imparts value. Call it a personal quirk but wanting to
>> impart the most value possible is something that often drives my decision
>> making in terms of what I dedicate my time to.
>
>
> It says a lot of positive things about your character if that is what
> motivates you!
>
> That is definitely a nice idea. I wonder if we might take it a step
>> further and just drop the last word (which may be incomplete). This is
>> untested:
>
>  <$text text={{{
>> [length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
>> ~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]search-replace:g:regexp[(.*)\s(\w+)$],[$1]]
>> }}}/>
>> What do you think?
>
>
> On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 at 14:21, Saq Imtiaz  wrote:
>
>> @Walt hopefully you are getting some helpful feedback here. Apologies for
>> the slight digression caused by my replying to Streams specific comments
>> and feedback.
>>
>> @fred you can also export using a filter from the Filter tab in Advanced
>> Search
>>
>> @Si,
>>
>>
>>> On the topic of how many people use it, maybe you could consider
>>> creating a Google Form and linking to it from the download page, asking
>>> users if they would take a second to answer some brief questions?
>>>
>>
>> I've been considering it for some time actually. Apart from feedback on
>> workflow, just knowing whether the number of people regularly using Streams
>> is < 10, 10-20, or 20+ would be very helpful.
>>
>>
>>> I was also wondering if you had considered setting up a way for users to
>>> donate? Not necessarily to fund development, just to show appreciation for
>>> great free software! I am not currently in a position to contribute much,
>>> but in the future I would certainly be happy to subscribe to a patreon or
>>> whatever.
>>>
>>
>> I think the most value for myself would be in just getting regular,
>> precise and on-topic feedback. Implementing new features in the absence of
>> user feedback is just driving blind from my perspective. I also find it
>> very frustrating and motivation sapping when I post ideas or demos and at
>> times get feedback that is far off topic or just so poorly written that it
>> is more frustrating than helpful.  Mind you, I try to be very understanding
>> of users for whom English is not their first language. It is actually very
>> pleasing how constructive and helpful this thread has been thus far in
>> comparison.
>>
>> I've also been considering asking for volunteers for a small group of
>> regular users of Streams for testing new features.. from my perspective
>> however how, much effort I put into adding new features to Streams is
>> highly dependent on how many people regularly use it and find that it
>> imparts value. Call it a personal quirk but wanting to impart the most
>> value possible is something that often drives my decision making in terms
>> of what I dedicate my time to. Otherwise the motivation for work on Streams
>> is just whatever seems interesting for me personally from a technical
>> perspective.
>>
>>
>>> I would add that like Mario I am very happy with the current features of
>>> streams, though I have made the following tweak to the text display for the
>>> breadcrumbs. It's a very minor thing, but in my opinion looks nicer than
>>> just cutting off the title mid-word:
>>>
>>> <$text text={{{
>>> [length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
>>> ~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]addsuf

Re: [tw5] NoteTaking in Streams

[Si Si]

Saq,

I've also been considering asking for volunteers for a small group of
> regular users of Streams for testing new features..


I'm happy to test stuff out as required.


> from my perspective however how, much effort I put into adding new
> features to Streams is highly dependent on how many people regularly use it
> and find that it imparts value. Call it a personal quirk but wanting to
> impart the most value possible is something that often drives my decision
> making in terms of what I dedicate my time to.


It says a lot of positive things about your character if that is what
motivates you!

That is definitely a nice idea. I wonder if we might take it a step further
> and just drop the last word (which may be incomplete). This is untested:

 <$text text={{{
> [length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
> ~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]search-replace:g:regexp[(.*)\s(\w+)$],[$1]]
> }}}/>
> What do you think?


On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 at 14:21, Saq Imtiaz  wrote:

> @Walt hopefully you are getting some helpful feedback here. Apologies for
> the slight digression caused by my replying to Streams specific comments
> and feedback.
>
> @fred you can also export using a filter from the Filter tab in Advanced
> Search
>
> @Si,
>
>
>> On the topic of how many people use it, maybe you could consider creating
>> a Google Form and linking to it from the download page, asking users if
>> they would take a second to answer some brief questions?
>>
>
> I've been considering it for some time actually. Apart from feedback on
> workflow, just knowing whether the number of people regularly using Streams
> is < 10, 10-20, or 20+ would be very helpful.
>
>
>> I was also wondering if you had considered setting up a way for users to
>> donate? Not necessarily to fund development, just to show appreciation for
>> great free software! I am not currently in a position to contribute much,
>> but in the future I would certainly be happy to subscribe to a patreon or
>> whatever.
>>
>
> I think the most value for myself would be in just getting regular,
> precise and on-topic feedback. Implementing new features in the absence of
> user feedback is just driving blind from my perspective. I also find it
> very frustrating and motivation sapping when I post ideas or demos and at
> times get feedback that is far off topic or just so poorly written that it
> is more frustrating than helpful.  Mind you, I try to be very understanding
> of users for whom English is not their first language. It is actually very
> pleasing how constructive and helpful this thread has been thus far in
> comparison.
>
> I've also been considering asking for volunteers for a small group of
> regular users of Streams for testing new features.. from my perspective
> however how, much effort I put into adding new features to Streams is
> highly dependent on how many people regularly use it and find that it
> imparts value. Call it a personal quirk but wanting to impart the most
> value possible is something that often drives my decision making in terms
> of what I dedicate my time to. Otherwise the motivation for work on Streams
> is just whatever seems interesting for me personally from a technical
> perspective.
>
>
>> I would add that like Mario I am very happy with the current features of
>> streams, though I have made the following tweak to the text display for the
>> breadcrumbs. It's a very minor thing, but in my opinion looks nicer than
>> just cutting off the title mid-word:
>>
>> <$text text={{{
>> [length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
>> ~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]addsuffix[...]] }}}/>
>>
>
> That is definitely a nice idea. I wonder if we might take it a step
> further and just drop the last word (which may be incomplete). This is
> untested:
>
>  <$text text={{{
> [length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
> ~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]search-replace:g:regexp[(.*)\s(\w+)$],[$1]]
> }}}/>
>
> What do you think?
> Cheers,
> Saq
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/-xTFWPwzq6g/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/0b65a408-28d6-4709-8e16-feb01355858en%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>

-- 
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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CAKKx7WYehBd1iNsuqB4r1JyLBoMA6ySXupT7aVN6i7OvjDxp2g%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [tw5] NoteTaking in Streams

[Si Si]

Hi Walt,

SO this is to ask all of you with any experience of Streams plugin: Can you
> relate to the need i am expressing?  Or have you found a good way "flatten"
> your streams, and integrate your Streams content properly into a TW
> instance?  If so, anything you might care to share in terms of workflow
> and/or code would be most appreciated.


I don't personally have any need to convert a stream into a bulleted list
within a single tiddler*.* As you note, outliners very useful for agile
note taking, but in my opinion a hierarchical list is not the best way to
*present* a single idea. So in general once I have moved my streams nodes
to their evergreen home, I aspire to convert my notes into more readable
prose. I do this by rearranging the nodes into a flat list, re-writing as
required, and then flattening with a button described here:
https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/rEtegfiGYJE/m/L0-euDfWAAAJ

In reality I rarely actually get to that stage, and am generally happy to
leave my evergreen notes in "node-form". I don't personally see any benefit
in converting them to a bulleted markdown list, but it depends on what your
use case is?

Meanwhile: i too would very much like to know who else is using Streams
> regularly, and in what sort of workflow(s).
> So if you are one, dear reader, please let us know!


 Hi Saq,

One of the things I would dearly like to know is how many people are
> actually using Streams on a regular basis, and what their workflow looks
> like. My feeling is its a very small handful and I'll admit that probably
> influences how much time I devote to working on Streams.


You may have seen it but I roughly described my workflow here:
https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/gbEHUyX8dc0/m/r1yF5JdXCAAJ

For me Streams excels at quickly capturing information that I cannot yet
fit into any main ideas within your knowledge. Being able to re-jig this
captured information is helpful for making sense of it, eventually
integrating them with the main ideas that I want to internalise. In
particular this can help to break through some of the constraints of linear
reading.

I aspire to one day build some incremental reading
 tools with TiddlyWiki,
which may partially replace my use of streams, but for now I have found
streams to be the best solution for non-linear reading.

On the topic of how many people use it, maybe you could consider creating a
Google Form and linking to it from the download page, asking users if they
would take a second to answer some brief questions?

I was also wondering if you had considered setting up a way for users to
donate? Not necessarily to fund development, just to show appreciation for
great free software! I am not currently in a position to contribute much,
but in the future I would certainly be happy to subscribe to a patreon or
whatever.

I would add that like Mario I am very happy with the current features of
streams, though I have made the following tweak to the text display for the
breadcrumbs. It's a very minor thing, but in my opinion looks nicer than
just cutting off the title mid-word:

<$text text={{{
[length[]compare:number:lt[40]then]
~[split[]first[40]join[]trim[]addsuffix[...]] }}}/>

 I wonder if you think it should be added when you next update?

On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 at 14:22, ludwa6  wrote:

> Picking up where this earlier thread
>  left off, i am
> following Saq's advice
>  to
> start another conversation on the more specific question of HOW best to use
> -and perhaps adapt- the Streams plugin, to make TW into a great tool for
> not only "intertwingly" NoteTaking (which it certainly is), but also great
> for agile NoteTaking, as defined in aforementioned thread.
>
> Having just installed the plugin (Streams 0.2.18) in my TiddlyDesktop
> instance, i am already fairly drunk on the power of having what feels like
> a full-fledged outliner *within* a tiddler, where i can bang out a stream
> of bullet points, promote & demote, indent & outdent, etc... All as fast as
> i can type the keystrokes, or drag&drop on mobile.
>
> But then: the result is a slew of tiddlers with long numeric IDs that, tho
> nicely presented in the edit window as a clean hierarchal outline, cannot
> be either flattened into a single tiddler, nor exported or even copy/pasted
> into the tiddler body via any built-in affordance.  I've been going the
> copy/paste way so far, but it's a hard road to travel, given any
> significant length and/or complexity to your outline.
>
> Now: plugin author Saq said essentially
> 
> that the only reason he hasn't built in any such affordance is that he
> doesn't know what users want: a simple concatenation of the stream? a
> hierarchial structure in some form?
>
> For me, the best (and simplest?) soluti