Amen, I have an embarrassingly large number books that could be acquired as ebooks. Still, now browsers have robust tab support cmd+clicking links (open in new tab) gets you out of that pickle. Assuming, , we don’t presume that any single page must be a complete/closed answer. TBH, I find the latter is the norm. We used to worry about per-print page costs, but far fewer people now print (except to PDF) these days. Once the codex-legacy constraint is removed, a hypertextual resource shines, though we do have to (learn to) follow links.
True, but this follows from the solecism that the author was able to accurately predict and tightly bound our question. The worse port of the Web is its insistence of offering answers to similar but not same questions as offering a wrong answer has to be better than no answer? Or so the tech code-bros seem to think.
Mean while, I’ve re-written linked 4 articles. The article Suggest Attribute value lists is now linked-to by the article on pre-populating Displayed Attributes and the System and User Inspector articles, and describes more explicitly the fact that a ‘list’ means a Tinderbox format data list, i.e. semi-colon delimited.
The article Suggest Attribute value lists really needs renaming and moving elsewhere, but that takes a full site refresh and I’m a tad busy ATM. Still, I hope the more explicit description of how to make a list helps future self when this thread is long forgotten.
If I knew how to overcome the limitations of human cognition, I suspect I would be earning more than Elon Musk right now! But it would probably help somewhat if more people were aware of just how limited we are. Then perhaps we could compensate to some extent. And believe me, we really are limited! As this fascinating video on change blindness will show: https://youtu.be/fXWuB7fmGv0
Agreed, but I have just spent a good six to eight months doing most of my computing using Obsidian (I manage to go quite a long way towards building a system in Obsidian, and it was only a few of its limitations that brought me to Tinderbox to see if I could overcome them). There are various places in Obsidian in which the paradigm is to use commas to separate items. So it is not surprising that the comma was the first thing I tried.
I wasn’t aware of that possibility, so that is very useful. But I guess that would not have helped me while using aTbRef on the web.
I’ve watched some of your videos, and they are very useful, but that was a while ago. I have been “away” from Tinderbox for a long time, and I’m not quite sure how things will develop this time. In the past I’ve often dabbled with Tinderbox for a few months, followed by a long period away because I found better solutions for what I wanted to achieve. But I get a feeling that this time I may have stumbled on something for which Tinderbox is going to be the better solution. Time will tell.
My wife is a Marriage and Family Therapist here in the US and she uses a package called SimplePractice, and frankly as much as I love Tinderbox, a package like that is where I would start for practice management. It’s got everything she needs for billing, insurance, scheduling, and secure teleconferencing. Plus there is great support with detailed knowledge of the profession.
What I’d use Tinderbox for would be research, Continuing Education, professional contacts and development, writing or blogging.
, we don’t presume that any single page must be a complete/closed answer. TBH, I find the latter is the norm. We used to worry about per-print page costs, but far fewer people now print (except to PDF) these days. Once the codex-legacy constraint is removed, a hypertextual resource shines, though we do have to (learn to) follow links.