On Monday, September 21, 2020 at 10:54:48 AM UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: I had an example Use Case to show but things changed so much in your tool > I'm revising it. Hopefully I have time soon. >
Yea, It was alpha as we started. It is beta now. So I think we settled on the naming conventions. > I note your comment on buttons. Right. > > I also read the detail on discussion of using it for macros. I'm slightly > nervous about that. > The GAINS on HTML insertion and CSS styling are very substantial. I would > not want handling macros to confuse the basic need to expand easy invoke of > HTML & CSS. > The existing widgets haven't been designed with our usecase in mind. Especially the button widget is a "monster". It has way too many different usecases and way to many parameters. Some of them are used, some of them don't. .. Depending on the usecase. ... That's why the action-widgets have been invented. .. They do _only 1 thing well_ There was a bug in the code, that made it impossible to handle widget parameters in the right way. I fixed it, and will publish it soon. > I do have issues with INLINE markup (°) in that there is no way to nest at > the moment. It is also "verbose" having to do °°match°°. > Yea, Inline needs more love. It's the basic function only. similar to @@match@@ So we don't win anything yet. Nesting like: °° xxxx °° yyyy °° zzz °° will never be possible. since the TW parser doesn't work that way with inlines. There is the _need_ to have a uniquely identifiable endstring. So the \customizeinline will need an _endString param to make nesting possible. -mario -- 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 tiddlywikidev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/e5238d52-7314-4c45-a1ef-18ccc7be6132o%40googlegroups.com.
