On Jun 1, 7:07 am, Oveek <mov...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 23, 10:52 pm, "cd...@peermore.com" <chris.d...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >By the way, if you haven't already done it, it's probably best to make > >your fork for tiddlyweb-plugins have tiddlyweb/tiddlyweb-plugins as > >its upstream, not cdent/tididlyweb-plugins. > > Yea I later realized most of the commit activity is in tiddlyweb/ > tiddlyweb-plugins. Is cdent/tiddlyweb mainly for releases?
tiddlyweb/tiddlyweb is for development of the core tiddlyweb/tiddlyweb-plugins is for development of plugins that are somehow "blessed" into the mainstream. At the moment blessed basically means I wrote them, or I said, "that's cool". I'm sure as tiddlyweb matures, plugin handling will need to be a bit more formal, but I'd rather pave the cow paths than whatever the opposite of that is. The cdent stuff is basically an orphan. With your plugins I can either pull them into tiddlyweb/tiddlyweb- plugins if you like, or just point to them from http://tiddlyweb.peermore.com/ (from its plugins section). > There's a potential problem when the filter is applied to recipes that > have multiple copies of the condition tiddler. If I understand > correctly, when there are multiple copies of a tiddler in the list of > bags making a recipe, the recipe uses whichever one appears in the > later bag. To give the right results the tiddlylinkfilter should use > the same condition tiddler used in the recipe after it is > 'uniquified', but as far as I can see, to do that requires knowing the > bags used by the recipe (and the order they occur in). I'm not sure I'm entirely following, but I'm short of coffee so far today. If the condition tiddler is a part of the recipe which it is then filtering, then once you get to the filtering stage you have the correct condition tiddler (because the recipe has already been processed) and each tiddler being processed has attributes 'bag' and 'recipe' which can be used to do some further inspection to find the right bag in which to find the tiddlers it is linking to. In control is a method called 'determine_tiddler_bag_from_recipe' which is probably useful here: for each link you can ask that method to tell you which bag to find that tiddler in. That could get time consuming, so the other option is to generate the list of tiddlers produced by the recipe the first time the filter is called, and then compare against that with subsequent filterings. I hope I'm making some sense here. Generally what I'm trying to say is that the tiddlers probably have the information you need to make the right thing happen, just dig into their attributes and see where you end up. > > How's it working out so far? Any surprises? > > It does a decent job fulfilling the basic on demand loading > requirement. I'm finding the lack of a complete timeline and taglist > to be kind of inconvenient. Also because of the flexibility in styling > TiddlyWikis, the initial tiddlers that need to be available can vary a > lot. I think skinny tiddlers / lazy loading will prove to be a more > useful approach in most cases. I've been kicking around some > ideas...I'll post an outline of that in a bit. One option with timeline and taglist is to completely replace the existing timeline and taglist ui elements with things that query the server for the information. This is probably not ideal, but is an option. I agree that skinny stuff is probably a better option for people working with TiddlyWeb content from TiddlyWiki. > I'd like to work out a skinny tiddler solution with you guys, and then > focus on the plugin and search issues. I have a feeling that dealing > with skinny tiddlers is going to require dipping into TiddlyWiki's > core at a fairly basic level. I think you are probably right. > > The way you've created your plugins is cool to see and really shows > > off some of the flexibility I hoped, but wasn't sure, that I was > > building into the system. > > The design of TiddlyWeb is really impressive. You've done a remarkable > job in making virtually every component extensible. Combined with the > extensibility of TiddlyWiki itself the possibilities are mind > boggling. Thanks. Python makes making things extensible quite easy. TiddlyWeb is also my first major project after being a different project when extensibility was way too hard, so I'm having a bit of a compensating response. > > You've made your plugins in a way that is > > almost entirely different from how I would do it, but in a perfectly > > reasonable and potentially better way. > > I'm very curious how you might have made the plugins. What I ended up > with was not really what I expected at the outset. Well the main difference is that I first noticed is you tend to be class oriented. Not a bad thing as it lets you carry around a fair bit of information where my usual approach (psuedo-functional) would not. I often have that "not really what I expected at the outset" with TiddlyWeb stuff. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To post to this group, send email to TiddlyWikiDev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywikidev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWikiDev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
