Multiline fields in raw *.tid file

[Felix Küppers]

Hi,

anybody knows whether it is somehow possible to put a fields value as multiline into a *.tid file (not the text field) so linebreaks are considered spaces?

e.g.

field1: bla
field2: blabla
 continued bla <-----!
fieldx: blub

hsdjkfh fdhjh gjkfdh gjkdfhg fdjkhg d
f jgfdkh gjkfdg
hfdjgh dfg

Thanks
Felix

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Felix

There's no support for multiline fields in .tid files. TiddlyWiki5 inherited the .tid file format from TiddlyWeb. I quite like that it is incredibly simple to parse, and would worry that introducing multiline field support would complicate compatibility. JSON is really the next level up, providing a more flexible, standard format at the expense of readability and writability.

Best wishes

Jeremy

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywikide...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddly...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Jeremy Ruston
mailto:jeremy...@gmail.com

[Felix Küppers]

Hi Jeremy,

thanks for the quick reply!

> I quite like that it is incredibly simple to parse, and would worry
> that introducing multiline field support would complicate compatibility.

Ok, I just wanted to know if I am missing something. Then I will just
set my text editor to "wrap lines" to edit tid-files with long lines.

Let's continue the midnight-coding session :)

-Felix

[Chris Dent]

On Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 10:31:10 PM UTC, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

 

There's no support for multiline fields in .tid files. TiddlyWiki5 inherited the .tid file format from TiddlyWeb. I quite like that it is incredibly simple to parse, and would worry that introducing multiline field support would complicate compatibility. JSON is really the next level up, providing a more flexible, standard format at the expense of readability and writability.

I vaguely recall FND and I have a discussion about how or if to implement multiline support in fields in the tid format and we basically decided that it wasn't worth the effort. The constraint is useful: for casual folk it reminds that fields are supposed to be just that, a field; for the more adventurous they are compelled to either use a more advance format (like the JSON you've pointed out) or do some special case encoding for their special case fields.

There are a lot of these kinds of decisions throughout TiddlyWeb (and presumably TiddlyWiki) that seem to have played out pretty well.