Hi Tobias,
>> 1. Tabs fields: fields like *filter* and *template* have changed to >> *list.filter* and *list.template*, and other fields have been added. >> >> Perhaps use a more specific *mt* prefix, e.g. *mt.filter*? > Yes, you're right. Maybe *mt.list.filter*, *mt.list.filter.heading*, *mt.list.filter.template, mt.tab.template*, etc. > Its very easy: if you create a tiddler tagged $:/tabs/foo, it will appear >> as a bottom tab in every tiddler tagged $:/type/foo and only there (unless >> you choose to have it as a default tab, and you can do that with the tag >> $:/action/is/default, or go to the control panel, under appearance and >> magic tabs tweaks). >> > > > I explain how to create custom new types and tabs in 5 easy tabs here: >> http://youtabs.tiddlyspot.com/ >> <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fyoutabs.tiddlyspot.com%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNE0MHdJdh229zGaOMMkBuzvz0JgZA> > > > Not sure what to make of this strategy in terms of... > > *Type video: *Add the tag $:/type/video to the video tiddlers. In this >> case: Introduction To TiddlyWiki >> *Type annotation: *Add the tag $:/type/annotation to the annotation >> tiddlers. > > > Why would I need an additional type tag? Isn't there a filter expression > that corresponds to what makes a tiddler of type *$:/type/video* or > *$:/type/annotation* or any other type? > Why an additional type tag ($:/type/annotation) ? It is not mandatory, but: 1. that way it is easier to look for video annotations and create list filters. You do the same using fields. 2. if you fill the field *contents.tag* with that tag, the macro <<tabContents>> will automatically display a list with a default filter using that tab. But you can use your own list filter, either using the field *list.filter*, or not using the <<tabContents>>. 3. if you create the tiddler $:/type/annotation with a caption, an icon, a template, they are automatically used by the macros <<tabCaption>> and <<inputSlider>>. 4. last but not least: *that way, annotation tiddlers can be first class citizens*, having their own dedicated tabs, view templates, etc. For instance, you may want a tab specific to video annotations showing related with the same topic, or documentation tiddlers talking about the same topic as the video annotation. > How about something more implicit, like... > > *$:/type/**field/**yt-id* > > ...without a need to declare some otherwise unneeded extra tags for > magic-tabs? > > And then have ... > > *contents.by.field: $:/type/field/yt-video* > > ...perhaps. The thing is, do I need / also want those *$:/type/video* and > *$:/type/annotation > *tags now and does that mean that I also need to overwrite the tags > template? > Sorry, I don't understand your point. > I was surely considering of abandoning the yt-video field as it seems much > more natural to have the annotation simply tag to the video, but then I > have the problem that a simple tagging relationship isn't a qualified one. > You need a qualified relationship between the video and its annotations, and the *yt-video* field works. You could use in the same way I use the *source* field. But if you use yt-video instead of source, you need to create specific list filters while source is used by default in MagicTabs. > > Also, if I kept something like *yt-video* as a qualified field then there > is that problem with generally distinguishing *yt-video* vs. *yt-videos*... > because, the latter would require a bracketed list like the tags field and > all the handling that goes with dissecting those bracketed list-items > whereas the *yt-video* field as a reference to a single *parent* does not > have any double square brackets and would probably fail if I wrapped those > tiddler titles in them. > Custom list fields are a pain in the neck. But I managed to have them working with fields like *authors*, *about*, *parent*, and I don't remember if *source*. > So, how do you harmonize these relations ships such that 1:1 is working > exactly like a 1:many in terms of how the data is being kept, i.e. by > entering that related tiddler via a "browse for some tiddler" popup just > like we have for tags? > > Mhhh, loads of further exploring and architectural design is needed, it > appears. > > I mean, hw would you handle the case where a tiddler would have two > parents, sources, etc...? > Its complicated but it works. When I have more than one author for the same book, they are all specified in the *authors* field and are treated as if they were tags. Idem for the *about* and *parent* field. Can't explain here. Best wishes, Alberto -- 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 post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
