I totally agree with Jed. IMO, if normal titling is becoming an issue to (ID) organise what you need, then a first step is to step back and consider the design architecture of what you wanting to do. The problem with other work-arounds is it adds complications and overheads.
FWIW, to deal with this issue I adopted two different approaches ... (1) where I need a clear ID I use the title field purely as the data-reference (e.g. Title-1_sub-7 etc) and the caption field for what is displayed. That is easy & reliable. (2) where I want to use the title field only, that is displayed, I think through a schema of naming that is nor overly laborious. Its not always optimal--but mostly it is. Best wishes Josiah Jed Carty wrote: > > This same argument has been made many times and there has never been a > solution presented that doesn't have the same problems as using a title. > You need to have a unique identifier on each tiddler, to link to a tiddler > you need this id. Regardless of how you twist things around this id is > equivalent to the title. I think that in most cases it is much more > convenient to have this id be a human readable one. > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/88e77df4-19cc-4a72-acba-119b804716e8%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
