On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 5:24:20 PM UTC+2, PMario wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 11:55:06 AM UTC+2, Felix Küppers wrote:
>>
>> Your problem of "losing related attachments" is not nice but you have NO
>> CHANCE to fix that as it is the tiddlywiki design and the same as
>> link-breaki
Hi Danielo,
if you do *not* have any attachments and just want to recreate the wiki
(its tiddlers) in a database* then it would be ok to stick with titles as
ids.*
Everytime Tiddlywiki deletes a tiddler you delete the document in the db.
Everytime a tiddler gets modified (added or changed) you
Hi Jeremy,
> I understand that you are suggesting a new UUID field that is independent
> of the title field. I'm responding that there is already a unique ID field
> for tiddlers; it's pointlessly expensive to enforce two unique IDs.
>
I don't think it is pointless in Danielo's case because th
>
> I think we are moving from the original topic. My real question was about
> external databases. So I want advise from the community and more
> experienced users if sync-adaptors should take care of giving each tiddler
> an unique ID or we should stick to tiddlers titles to make the process
Hello Jeremy
I think we are moving from the original topic. My real question was about
external databases. So I want advise from the community and more
experienced users if sync-adaptors should take care of giving each tiddler
an unique ID or we should stick to tiddlers titles to make the proce
Hi Danielo
I understand that you are suggesting a new UUID field that is independent
of the title field. I'm responding that there is already a unique ID field
for tiddlers; it's pointlessly expensive to enforce two unique IDs. Hence
my proposal of what I think is a viable way for TiddlyWiki to be
Hello Jeremy,
I don't know why every time someone talks about UIDS everyone thinks
automatically in titles. I'm not talking about using this IDS as titles,
neither to identify a tiddler in any way. We are just talking about assigning
one unique ID to each tiddler. Why is this so problematic? W
This topic has come up several times; I probably ought to add a faq to
tiddlywiki.com/dev.
Here's one thread from last year about it:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/Y1V7oyBLpSs/discussion
The tl;dr version is that TiddlyWiki already uses unique IDs to identify
tiddlers, the "title"
I think, the important part here is. Users will always face tiddler names
> only. .. you can easily prefix them.
>
As you said, we want to focus on humans. People usually don't want to add a
prefix to each of their tiddlers only to determine the wiki or user they
belongs to. Also, we don't ha
Emphasising cloning approach
How about this for a work-around: When a tiddler is cloned, a ClonedFrom field
is created. When you want to change the title of a tiddler, clone it then
change give it a new name.
There could be a "refactor links" plugin which could seek out cloned
tiddlers, reference
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 1:51:29 PM UTC+2, Danielo Rodríguez wrote:
>
> When we get the TWederation set up, unique tiddler IDs might become of
> general interest.
>
> This is something that confuses me. Jeremy has expressed his interest on
> federation, but all the comments and attitudes of an
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 12:26:45 PM UTC+2, Danielo Rodríguez wrote:
>
> I do have a chance! please, don't tell me NO CHANCE, I get depressed
> easily :P
>
:) As I wrote imo used UUIDs ... You will have a bit more work to do. Let
the users use names and internally use your uuids.
m
--
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 11:55:06 AM UTC+2, Felix Küppers wrote:
>
> Your problem of "losing related attachments" is not nice but you have NO
> CHANCE to fix that as it is the tiddlywiki design and the same as
> link-breaking when changing the title. I think the only reason tiddlywiki
> pref
Hello Felix
> Sorry, sorry. I didn't mean to say no chance, I just wanted to say you
> need to be prepared to develop some workarounds :) Nothing is impossible it
> is just a matter of creativity and we know you are one of the creative guys
> around ;
>
>
No problem, I was just joking (I think
Hi Danielo,
> I do have a chance! please, don't tell me NO CHANCE, I get depressed
> easily :P You were my inspiration, your plugin is my inspiration!
> Reading this is impossible coming from you has more meaning than
> anyone else!
Sorry, sorry. I didn't mean to say no chance, I just wanted to
Hello Mat
El martes, 26 de mayo de 2015, 13:18:29 (UTC+2), Mat escribió:
>
> Just two notes, to dismiss if nothing else:
> I believe the intention is to introduce version handling for tiddlers. I
> assume this would mean saving copies of old versions(?)
>
Not exactly. I'm just talking about being
Just two notes, to dismiss if nothing else:
I believe the intention is to introduce version handling for tiddlers. I
assume this would mean saving copies of old versions(?)
When we get the TWederation set up, unique tiddler IDs might become of
general interest.
<:-)
--
You received this messag
El martes, 26 de mayo de 2015, 11:55:06 (UTC+2), Felix Küppers escribió:
>
> Hi Danielo,
>
> I faced the same problem with tiddlymap. When just renaming a tiddler, you
> have no information about what was the original title and what were the
> original fields. This makes it hard for any extern
Hi Danielo,
I faced the same problem with tiddlymap. When just renaming a tiddler,
you have no information about what was the original title and what were
the original fields. This makes it hard for any external db or even a
plugin (like tiddlymap) to track which original object changed.
Therefore
Hello everyone,
I know that the topic of titles as tiddlers ID have been discussed several
times for TW itself. But what about external stores? This is directly
related to sync adaptors and external databases as store for the tiddlers.
Normally in databases there is a primary key, that is unique
20 matches
Mail list logo
