You don’t actually change the value of TW’s “currentTiddler” when you create a list. You’re creating a new variable, called currentTiddler, scoped to the list.
As they get more complex like using multiple transclusions or macros that use macros it is good to have each macro respond to currentTiddler, rather than demand a tiddlername be provided.
Hi Mark, I have a fix for tw-checklist. Coupled with autolist mod and a toolbar icon + keyboard shortcut, it is quite fast. No field or tag pollution. Ping me if of interest. It is not packaged.
In my workflow (beyond the Autolist mod mentioned above), I have fixed a minor functionality issue in tw5-checklist itself, and I added an option in the configuration tiddler to hide/show the input form. Together with a toolbar button/keyboard shortcut, the checklists behave like numbered or bulleted lists during input.
I appreciate everyone cross referencing other checklists, but this thread has being hijacked.
I would liked to have discussed the original idea rather than all its alternatives.
In future feel free to mention other solutions but please start your own thread and link to that as well in the same reply (edit later if necessary).
My own thoughts on the original quicklist here is as follows;
Create the fields with a prefix such as $:/local/ item content
Exclude “system fields” or [prefix[$:/local/]] fields from the new field dropdown
make a “quicklist” tiddler just one of multiple types of tiddlers that have a different viewTemplate handling. In this case it simply turns each line / list item into a line with a checkbox.
I plan to use the object-type field to select from different viewTemplates and hide the existing $:/core/ui/ViewTemplate/body
this generic solution would allow us to create a whole range of different tiddlers that respond differently to the content of the text field.
I like that plan! I understood previously that you had plans for a small series of quicklets or what ever name you would give a collection. The fun part is, that other people can add to that and we could end up with a nice collection of small and easy - but useful tiddlers.
@TW_Tones, I don’t think the thread was hi-jacked. Rather that, inevitably, the topic falls between semantics and technical operations. One person’s checklist is another’s vague probing. What is my point? Merely that that checklists could be a (1) list of definitive directives, or series of prompts (2) probing the netherverse.
I very much appreciate your overall intent. I think the central issue is that the “content” of items varies between “closed / definitive” and “open / vague rambling probing”. TBH, checklists, in general, are seriously under-theorised as both open and closed mechanisms.
The content of items can matter.
Not wishing to throw a spanner into the works. But worth saying, I think.
TT, x
My attention was drawn back to this thread due to someone liking a post. I thought I would just mention some possibilities given the updates of late or pending to tiddlywiki.
As at the original post we can make use of the template cascades to have tiddlers parsed differently like the original Quicklist idea.
We could store the todo items as titles in a single list field, especially in TW 5.2.3 with the new Checkbox widget listField parameter.
I would like to release a series of quick, in tiddler, solutions but unfortunately have other “life issues” to deal with. I may return here and post a quicklist update.
There is an edge case where tw5-checklist works wrongly!
Try to create a checklist with two similar entries like
[ ] Milk
[ ] Milk
[ ] Bread
Of course this is an edge case. I have the same issue in Shiraz quick table (task list example )
The reason is the check/uncheck action uses a global search/replace
I also enjoyed tw5-checklist and found that issue, unfortunately I’m not skilled enough to know if what I’m about to say would help or not, but if it relies on a global search and replace, couldn’t the plugin wrap the corresponding text with span’s and give them uniquely generated ids? maybe using the date created, down to the second?
Just food for thought, I’m sure there are better methods out there to resolve it, I’m personally pretty sad that it’s no longer being updated and whatnot.
Hi Justin,
Have you submitted a ticket on GitHub? The plugin is in JS and I cannot debug it. But to be honest this edge case is very rare in real life!
So, enjoy it!