Thanks for input everyone! @ Mohammad wrote: > > Why not to oped a ticket at GitHub? >
It is good to refine a proposal or request through discussion first, so that when something is eventually posted on gh it can be very specific and all misunderstandings (including my own), objections etc have been dealt with. @Tony - config tiddlers sound like a good idea. Have you elaborated on the concept somewhere? (demo?) My OP is mainly about *findability* though. You say *"Each config tiddler could include a caption and description"* but this still does not solve findability unless you have a very wide definition of a "description". To use my example in the OP; a user typing in either of the terms *color, colour, style, appearance*, > etc - of course - get the Palette stuff (and probably more). Should a "description" cover this? @PMario > I don't really know, why you ask me. ... But I think it is a good idea! > Happy you agree! The reason I turned to you is because my proposal to solve this generically would be by means of *tagging*. Tagging is, after all, the main way to make things findable. But it would obviously not be appropriate to show a big number of arbitrary tags on tiddlers. However, these tags would not be of the same "kind" as ordinary tags that are typically used for *structuring*. In contrast, these tags for finding should work *behind-the-scenes*! In other words; they should be hidden. You've objected to hidden tags in the past but, again, these would be *systemic* information just like how the tiddler *type* or *custom field data* often is hidden. What is you opinion on this? Or, I should phrase it like so; Is there a better alternative? If I understand you right, you're proposing to make the various Controlpanel tabs findable/targetable by somehow including search terms in the tab-tiddlers - yes? (...but you also say it should only be ONE search term??) I might misunderstand something but I still don't see how this would actually help a searcher unless he happens to use the magic keyword in his search. The idea to make the Controlpanels tab-tiddlers findable is interesting but I think it misses the mark. Here's a case in point from using Windows: I have a portable loud speaker that sometimes connects, sometimes not. It is extremely frustrating to right-click > "Open the sound settings" only to realize the settings there are insufficient... so I search for audio drivers which is in the Device Manager ... > Properties ....but that shows this one (image) : [image: Captureaudio.PNG] <about:invalid#zClosurez> ...after a lot of internet search, I've found I really need to access this one: [image: Captureaudio2.PNG] <about:invalid#zClosurez> Clearly, ALL of these things should have come up when I search for sound or loudspeaker. The results (all of them) could be presented in some prioritized order and the search engine could allow for a finer search but the approach is just not sufficient. In contrast, Chrome > Settings behave more like what I'm talking about: Searching for, say, "Sound" presents a list that seems to be a mix of direct settings *and* categories with settings contain the searched word. ... So, in addition to the *problem description* in the OP, my question is if there is a better *solution* than to utilize hidden tags in order to actually *find* everything relevant when searching? The tags, or search words, would presumably be in some separate field, directly editable in edit mode - but they can also be transcluded to some central search-datatiddler. And to fellow PMario; what do you think of the idea to treat such pure search tags as *systemic tags* and therefore hide them? Any better ideas? Thank you all. <:-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/b3674938-faac-4d7e-9e53-4efc950cbd20%40googlegroups.com.
