Re: [tw] TW5 question about embedded image links

2014-12-10 Thread Jeremy Ruston
Hi Dave But since I mentioned creating tiddlers with the html or [img[ text, then > can't I still do both of these things? > I'm not quite sure what you mean. We're talking about the differences between the different ways of displaying images. What is that you're thinking you can't do? > That i

Re: [tw] TW5 question about embedded image links

2014-12-09 Thread David Gifford
Thanks, Jeremy, but: > > If you're just manually creating links to images then probably the main > reason to use the _canonical_uri approach is so that you can refer to an > image via a convenient tiddler title instead of the long URL. Users can > also open external image tiddlers directly in t

Re: [tw] TW5 question about embedded image links

2014-12-09 Thread Jeremy Ruston
Hi Dave The [img[url]] syntax creates an instance of the <$image> widget. That means that you can use it with URLs or with images that have been imported as tiddlers. The HTML syntax only works with URLs. If you're just manually creating links to images then probably the main reason to use the _

[tw] TW5 question about embedded image links

2014-12-09 Thread David Gifford
Hi all Just curious what the practical difference is between creating a tiddler with an image link like this: http://blablabla.jpg";> and creating a tiddler with an image link like this: [img[http://blablabla.jpg]] and creating a tiddler with an image link like this: field: _canonical_uri ht