This is just “Layout” feature. Many of my plugins already use new layout to display tiddlers with random title. For example:
And when you open it on the standard layout’s story, it will show caption due to a view template cascade.
@TW_Tones While my command palette can ignore title field when search tiddlers with _prefer_field field, but to add this to default search, It should be a standard in the core wikitext in empyt edition.
TidGi already do so, it preconfig many things, and with 70+ preinstalled plugins, and it give Chinese Tiddlywiki communtiy 1000% grouth during 2 years. Before it, many people think Tiddlywiki is very hard to use, with many things to learn, and is even worse than Obsidian in difficulty to configue things. But this is the topic for How to stimulate User Growth of TW?
Yu need only modify the fields in $:/core/ui/DefaultSearchResultList to include an additional field in the search [!is[system]search:title<userInput>sort[title]limit[250]] nbecomes [!is[system]search: title<userInput>sort[title]limit[250]]
Have you considered using the existing mechanism Customising search results along with a title cascade? Both can be added without touching the core.
My personal view is your proposed change is too much while affording little. I believe we can do without it and use existing mechanisms when needed, or if a change is to be made make a much more versatile change,
Maybe you don’t use features that may generate random title. But this is a common feature in the future, Tiddlywiki will become an app platfrom, many of them will use random title to store data, look at how calendar plugin works.
We should aware that, tw core is not about feature, it is about standard. There will be more plugin developers, and they will copy code from tw core to build new features. Tw core is the guidance for developers.
I understand the issue with auto generated titles even machine readable, or random ones and needing to present an alternative title. I have no problem with what you want I have a different view on how to do it and consider the need to alter the core unnessasary.
I would be happy to build a solution for you to address your requirements, and can, however I have already pointed to these different approaches here and elsewhere.
I believe plugin side will build many new features on this standard. But it won’t introduce much change and feature on core side.
I will wait a month before I start making changes, there will be more ideas coming out.
Hi @linonetwo I think you are asking for us as a community to agree a common way to represent tiddlers that should not have titles that are visible to the end user. I broadly agree, and welcome the initiative.
Firstly, I think it’s important to note that @linonetwo is not proposing a new core feature. This is about the community coming to agreement about how to represent a particular state of affairs in TiddlyWiki.
There are numerous analogous implicit agreements that underpin the TiddlyWiki ecosystem: for example, that the wikified caption field takes precedence over the title in certain situations.
The specific case of representing tiddlers that should not have user visible titles is, I think, a fairly generic need that has cropped up in the work of more than one plugin author.
Secondly, as others have noted, there are two broad approaches:
In many situations, the flexibility of the second approach is preferred. However, here one of our concern is interoperability. It would be nice to be able to drag tiddlers from Streams to another titleless tool, and have things work.
So, for that reason, I favour an intrinsic marker. I think I prefer the boolean form of an _is_titleless field where a non-blank value indicates true.
Of course, having an intrinsic marker available shouldn’t rule out more custom solutions, if I understand correctly.
For the thousands of bibliographic bibtex-folrmatted tiddlers I already have, I like the idea that the tiddlers remain straight-up bibtex-standard json. No need for extra fields. So my story-river titlebar solution includes a filter-based solution to bypass the title field in favor of a nicely formatted citation (or whatever) — for exactly those tiddlers that have the earmarks of being bibtex tiddlers.
Having a community standard per-tiddler way of deflecting attention from the title — in favor of whatever other field (or cascade) we agree on — would not need to conflict with this kind of “wholesale” approach, right?
Yes, it’s an API for future plugins (for plugin developers), so developers don’t need to think about the naming, don’t need to ask it in the forum again.
It is mostly an API between plugins: A new plugin is going to use this API to call other plugins. (Not calling tw-core’s feature!)
If your note and the plugin that generate your note not using this API, you are just out of the circle of those new plugins. Not other drawback.
I hope this could happened before I start writing my tw plugins, so I don’t have to ask about this in the forum.
