I see Roam has a query API (nice wordings ). It mimics part of what we can do in Tiddlywiki using WikiText like using $list to filter all tiddlers tagged with say HelloThere, …
My question is what can call our WikiText scripting? TiddlyWiki Scripting API? …
Using WIkiText, one can do
Document query
Create UI
Do many jobs without using JavaScript (You need JS elsewhere like checkbox actions,)
To me, WikiText (TwText) is TiddlyWiki’s markdown syntax. It is just the stuff for formatting text, the substitute for HTML and CSS (the stuff for look and feel).
Widgets, that’s scripting. TiddlyWiki Script, or TW Script.
The curly bracket syntax for transclusion, whether double or triple curly brackets, that’s also TW Script, but in a convenient short hand.
Same for the square bracket syntax for links. Short hand notation for TW Script.
Although, for example, input elements are HTML elements, I consider them the visual elements of the scripting language because they “do” things
All of the filter operators, I see them as TiddlyWiki Query Language, or TW Query Language, or TwQL.
Oh yeah, and then there are “metaprogramming” things: pragmas, for example. (TwMetaProgramming)
Addenda:
There is huge value in using a language that is consistent with the general landscape. And categorizing the things that are TiddlyWiki with a language that people know.
Like HTML and CSS are about formatting and structure and javascript is about “programming”, WikiText is about formatting and structure, and widgets are about programming. And filter operators are like SQL.
Search the web for “wiki text”, and we find that it is about being able to do what HTML and CSS do, but without doing HTML and CSS.
There is cognitive value in using an apples to apples and oranges to oranges terminology to describe things in TiddlyWiki vis-à-vis the other products out there. It makes learning easier to componentize with 1-ish to 1-ish features/concepts.
Although that tugs at my heartstrings, there have been reoccurring discussions about a desire to change names of things to move away from the words “Tiddly”, “Tiddler”, and “Wiki”. It would seem that these are sore points for many folk when trying to pitch TiddlyWiki.
Personally, I think renaming a product is the kiss of death. Calling “TiddlyWiki” “TW” feels like a sweet spot to me. Long name and short name that go well together. Hence “Tw-*” for all of the names I suggested.
I just don’t want the annoyance of yet another discussion about the name of TiddlyWiki.
But if there were a vote about the OP here: I like Tiddly. Always have, always will.
I agree with you on a lot of your points, and sadly you make a good point about the name of the product itself being a bit of a community sore point.
Just to add to what you said though, the fields used in tiddlers themselves could benefit from having the prefix tw-(or tf for tiddlyfield, or whatever could be decided upon in the future) so that, if a user wishes to for their own reasons, they can use whatever field name they might desire, without causing any complications with the internal workings of their tw.
Just something that has popped up for me in the past with wanting to use fields like ‘status’ or ‘type’ etc. (I’ve since found workarounds but these make for good examples.)
Doesn’t really pertain to the discussion, but I just felt like sharing haha
I would suggest not using API (Application Programming Interface), apart from being an acronym it is more often implemented now days as a call one has to prepare parameters for and request or send information to a host or server.
Wikitext scripting is much more like programming statements as in JavaScript than an API.
Mario, You love the boffin terms (me too) but the rule is “the first time you use it to spell it out”. For example Domain Specific Language (DSL) the when you mention it later only then are you permitted to use DSL.
This means if you do not know the acronym search for it and the first instance defines it.
But also communication with a broad audience demands the avoidance of acronyms.