(TW5) Ordering lists by date

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Having long used TiddlyWiki 5 as a journal, I have lots of tiddlers titled in a dd/mm/yyyy format, such as 29/02/2016.

I am trying to make a list of books I have read, organized by date finished. Here is the code I am using:

<$list filter="[!has[draft.of]tag[reading]sort[finished]]">
<br/>
//<$link to={{!!title}}><$view field="title"/></$link>// by <$view field="author"/> | <$link to={{!!began}}><$view field="began"/></$link> - <$link to={{!!finished}}><$view field="finished"/></$link>

</$list>

The title of the book is the title of the tiddler, and my fields are author, began, and finished, which I expect are fairly self explanatory. This code turns my began and finished dates into links that lead to the relevant journal entries. Unfortunately, the list is being organized by day, not year, then month, then day, as seen here:

Pure by Andrew Miller | 30/04/2016 - 08/05/2016
The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins | 18/02/2016 - 29/02/2016
The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears by Dinaw Mengestu | 27/04/2016 - 30/04/2016

Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I may adjust the list to display the books in proper chronological order? Thank you.

[PMario]

Hi Michael,

TW doesnt know that your field should be interpreted as a date, So the sort order is alphabetical.

You can use YYYY/MM/DD  as a format. It will still be sorted alphabetically but this time it works, since this format naturally sorts.

have fun!
mario

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Mario,

Thank you for your suggestion. While that is certainly something I can try, my difficulty stems from the fact that my journal tiddlers are titled in a dd/mm/yyyy format. If I was to list the dates in the "began" and "finished" fields as YYYY/MM/DD, then they would no longer function as links. Is there any way around this?

Thank you,

Michael

[PMario]

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 1:54:36 PM UTC+2, michaelha...@gmail.com wrote:

Thank you for your suggestion. While that is certainly something I can try, my difficulty stems from the fact that my journal tiddlers are titled in a dd/mm/yyyy format.

I see!
 

If I was to list the dates in the "began" and "finished" fields as YYYY/MM/DD, then they would no longer function as links. Is there any way around this?

You can open the control panel and set the "Title of new journal tiddlers" setting to: YYYY/0MM/0DD So they will be created in the same way.
see: http://tiddlywiki.com/#%24%3A%2FControlPanel

I know that's not really a good solution if you already have a lot of journal tiddlers. ... It may be a lot of work but probably less, than changing TWs behaviour.

-m

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Mario,

Thank you for your help. Unfortunately I have about three and a half years worth of journal tiddlers already, and renaming all of those for the sake of one list really does not seem efficient. I expect I will just have to find some other way of organizing the information.

Thanks,

Michael

[PMario]

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 2:44:55 PM UTC+2, michaelha...@gmail.com wrote:

Thank you for your help. Unfortunately I have about three and a half years worth of journal tiddlers already, and renaming all of those for the sake of one list really does not seem efficient. I expect I will just have to find some other way of organizing the information.

Yea, that hurts. ... So we have to think about a better solution :/

may be improving the sort[] filter parameter. It may be useful in general.

What do the "filter gurus" think??
-m

[PMario]

may be an extension similar to sortby: http://tiddlywiki.com/#sortby%20Operator:[[sortby%20Operator]]%20[[sortby%20Operator%20%28Examples%29]]

eg: sortbydate[DD/MM/YYYY] or so

[prog...@assays.tv]

michaelha... & PMario

i am not a programmer BUT isn't the fact that these JOURNAL entries were CREATED at certain exact times recorded at that moment into a (hidden) field? Could they not be sorted by that?

josiah

[The Bo]

If your "finished"-field is identical to your last modification you could try sort[modified].

[Mark S.]

... or sort[created] for the creation date.

You can also make the created date visible by changing the value of $:/config/EditTemplateFields/Visibility/created to "show". That would allow you to fix those journal entries that had been created out of order. You have to be careful not to delete any of the digits. But if you just change the first 8, you should be all right. I believe the first 8 digits are in yyyymmdd order.

Mark

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Thank you, everyone, for your input, but--and I may be mistaken--I think this may have gotten off topic somewhere. I am not trying to change my journal tiddlers (if I can help it). I am trying to make a list of books I have read, each as its own tiddler, and organized by the date I finished the book.

Again, here is the code I am using:

<$list filter="[!has[draft.of]tag[reading]sort[finished]]">

<br/>
//<$link to={{!!title}}><$view field="title"/></$link>// by <$view field="author"/> | <$link to={{!!began}}><$view field="began"/></$link> - <$link to={{!!finished}}><$view field="finished"/></$link>

</$list>

At the moment, I get a list like this:

Pure by Andrew Miller | 30/04/2016 - 08/05/2016
The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins | 18/02/2016 - 29/02/2016
The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears by Dinaw Mengestu | 27/04/2016 - 30/04/2016

I am trying to find a way to get this list in chronological order, rather then numerical. However, I am trying to keep the dd/mm/yyyy format, so I can use the dates as links to my journal entries.

Does this make sense?

[Mark S.]

If your "finished" tiddlers were created on the same date they were finished, then sorting by "created" instead of "finished" should accomplish what you want. The "finished" field then becomes a link/descriptor field.

For those tiddlers that you did not create on the actual finish date, you can go and tweak the "created" date so that they are in sync. The created date can be revealed by changing the contents of the shadow tiddler

$:/config/EditTemplateFields/Visibility/created

Please specify if there is something wrong with this approach, since it seems like it should match up closely to what you want. Of course, if you made all those tiddlers on days different from their date stamp, then that won't work.


Good Luck,
Mark

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Mark,

Thank you, that method looks like it should work. Having tried it though, I find myself running into a bit of an issue. I have updated my code to look like this:

<$list filter="[!has[draft.of]tag[reading]sort[!created]]">
<br/>
//<$link to={{!!title}}><$view field="title"/></$link>// <$view field="author"/> | <$link to={{!!began}}><$view field="began"/></$link> - <$link to={{!!finished}}><$view field="finished"/></$link>

</$list>

The !created is so that my most recently read books are on the top. However, while using sort[created] puts the tiddlers in sequential order:

The Once and Future King by T. H. White | 10/06/2015 - 29/09/2015

The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins | 18/02/2016 - 29/02/2016

Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert | 29/02/2016 - 27/03/2016
Tess of the d'Urbervilles by Thomas Hardy | 28/03/2016 - 25/04/2016

The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears by Dinaw Mengestu | 27/04/2016 - 30/04/2016

Pure by Andrew Miller | 30/04/2016 - 08/05/2016

Using sort[!created] seems to mix them up for some reason:

Pure by Andrew Miller | 30/04/2016 - 08/05/2016

The Beautiful Things That Heaven Bears by Dinaw Mengestu | 27/04/2016 - 30/04/2016
The Moonstone by Wilkie Collins | 18/02/2016 - 29/02/2016

Tess of the d'Urbervilles by Thomas Hardy | 28/03/2016 - 25/04/2016
The Once and Future King by T. H. White | 10/06/2015 - 29/09/2015
Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert | 29/02/2016 - 27/03/2016

Any ideas what is going on here?

Thank you.

[Mark S.]

The syntax is  !sort[created]

Good luck!
Mark

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

That has done it! Thank you, Mark, and everyone who was kind enough to help me find a solution.

[Mark S.]

For anyone interested in living dangerously, here is my first attempt at writing a filter. In the filter syntax, it takes the form

sortddmmyyyy[mydatefield]

I have barely tested it, and have no idea what happens if you throw incorrectly formatted stuff at it. It wants dates like "dd/mm/yyyy". No other separator than /, all 3 fields.

Be absolutely certain to back up your TW if you try this.

Mark

[PMario]

On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 8:00:58 PM UTC+2, Mark S. wrote:

sortddmmyyyy[mydatefield]

I was thinking about a syntax similar to this

sortbydate:fieldname[format]  eg: sortbydate:finished[DD/MM/YYY]  which would make it possible to use any http://tiddlywiki.com/#DateFormat

-m

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Mario,

If I were to try sortbydate:finished[DD/MM/YYYY], how would you suggest I integrate it into the list I have at the moment?

If this is the basic form:

<$list filter="[!has[draft.of]tag[reading]sort[finished]]">
<br/>

//<$link to={{!!title}}><$view field="title"/></$link>// <$view field="author"/> | <$link to={{!!began}}><$view field="began"/></$link> - <$link to={{!!finished}}><$view field="finished"/></$link>

</$list>

Where would sortbydate:finished[DD/MM/YYYY] go in the code? At the least:

<$list filter="[!has[draft.of]tag[reading]sortbydate:finished[DD/MM/YYYY]]">

Does not seem to work.

[Mark S.]

The filter Mario is suggesting doesn't exist -- that's why it doesn't work.

I guess I wonder how often anyone needs this particular functionality?

Mark

[michaelha...@gmail.com]

Mark,

Thank you for clearing that up, and for your patience with me. I can only assume I am one of the awkward people who uses an awkward date format.

[PMario]

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 3:54:28 PM UTC+2, michaelha...@gmail.com wrote:

Thank you for clearing that up, and for your patience with me. I can only assume I am one of the awkward people who uses an awkward date format.

No, You and your date format are perfectly fine ;). ... It's just a usecase, where we don't have an "out of the box" solution yet.
-m

[Denny]

Use this:
<<list-links "[tag[Journal]sort[created]order[reverse]]">>