Open twMat opened 8 years ago
IMO those search titles should appear also under Info and probably under tab References.
I agree, the info panel is really the place that should include the broadest possible results, including all references to (what appears to be missing): shadow tiddlers.
I very rarely use the Info tab after dismissing it early on in my TW5 use as pretty un-informative.
I tend to agree that the ui is rather poorly accessible and requires way too many clicks, reorientation and also waiting for some animations to finish. And then it has the habit of somewhat arbitrarily auto-closing, too.
Any tabs in it definitely should include the most (available / relevant) information possible.
As for the info-button I am feeling it should really be a popup. You hover (or click) the input button and it lists all available tabs. Once you select one, the target tab is directly opened.
@twMat, perhaps rename the issue to "improve TiddlerInfo"... and rephrase the OP to reflect a more actionable, numbered, comprehensive list with desired improvements.
Title and OP updated, thanks @tobibeer - please tell me if anything is still unclear. And you might want to update your two comments to it so they don't confuse new readers.
[General philosophy: TiddlerInfo tool should be a "complete" aggregation of systemic meta-data for (only) the current tiddler.]
Proposal: Systemtiddlers, like non-system tiddlres, should under Info>References list the same "reference results" that you get when using the search tool.
Example
$:/themes/tiddlywiki/vanilla/metrics/storywidth
Info>References lists nothing, and neither do any of the other Info tabs other than Advanced which states where it is defined. Still, a search (on tw.com) gives four shadow tids and two system tids.
IMO those search titles should appear also under Info and probably under tab References.
(I often find it surprisingly complicted to locate things (most notably CSS settings) - and, come to think of it, I very rarely use the Info tab after dismissing it early on in my TW5 use as pretty un-informative. I think the above might be a reason why.)