Mass Un-camel-case Every Tiddler Title

[TW_Tones]

With tiddlywiki you have so many possible options it is hard to imagine them all, take my word there is no problem here.

• Keep in mind TiddlyWiki is by definition a Wiki, this is a core function of wikis, but yes you can avoid and or refactor as your heart desires.
• The solution on this thread is a useful retrospective tool.

Some thoughts on this;

• When authoring a tiddler or the whole wiki decide if you want to make use of camel case
  • Use plain English and no camel case and turn off Control Panel, Settings, Camel Case Wiki Links so your McIntyre will be left alone.
  • Use the editor toolbar [[*]] to wrap words or phrases to generate internal links and cross references
• If you chose to use camel case but now want to change them
  • install the relink plugin and open each tiddler using camel case and rename them without camel case, all links to it will be updated (and Use Eric/Mohamad’s tool)
• If you want to think ahead instead of using camel case and [[ ]] use a macro to generate links to other tiddlers, we can use the excise button to invoke a macro or create another Editor Toolbar button to wrap links in a custom macro with any features you want, like use the tiddlers caption.
• We could even create an editor toolbar button that given selected words (Currently forming camel case) could be converted to sentence case and rename the tiddler linked to, needs a little regex.

Inspired by this thread I may very well build an editor Toolbar button in time, and I think it would be nice to build a tool that allows you to drag and drop or export any tiddler along with every internal link and their tiddlers.

[Sii]

Thanks for the replies!

@Charlie_Veniot

Maybe most folk recognize CamelCase, the grouping of words, as an abstract thing that means something in the same way an icon means something.

Yes this has a lot to do with why I am considering the change. I am more interested in titles being recognisable than readable, if that makes sense. For me a title is just a label for an idea, rather than something that is descriptive in of itself.

@noa

I think my reasons are very similar to Springer’s. When I send pages from my wiki to friends, I want it to read naturally. Although even with just a private-facing wiki, I feel the same way. I like the aesthetic of a “normal”- looking page with links that don’t break up the natural flow of the language.

Now I’m curious to know for Sii and others who are switching to/sticking with CamelCase, what elements convinced you to do that?

Like many peopIe I use TiddlyWiki as a zettelkasten for collecting and engaging with idea-oriented notes. The goal is to treat each of these notes as individual units to be reused.

For me unique titles are a crucial part of this system. Naming an idea mimics chunking. By reducing an idea into a single label the idea can more readily be reused in different contexts without overloading your working memory. This is analogous to using functions in a programming language. Functions abstract away the details of a block of code into a single unit that you can reuse and layer together with other functions to form a complex system that your brain would not otherwise be able to make sense of.

Up until now I have used complete sentences as titles - inspired by Andy Matuschak’s notes. I have just tended to find that this makes it harder to think of ideas as individual units. I struggle to remember the names I have used, and often mix up ideas, or end up duplicating them. I think I often struggle to distinguish between the title and the content of the tiddler in my mind, probably because they are both just written in normal English.

I am considering CamelCase titles because the are more like individual words an thus better suited as labels or ‘chunks’. The main downside that I anticipate is that I feel it might encourage less atomic ideas. I still want each tiddler represent a specific claim, and I don’t want tiddlers to end up just being categories that list a bunch of broadly related ideas.

I agree, however, that this approach might not be well-suited for a public facing or shared wiki.