easier way to source...

[Ckorik]

Just curious - is there an easier way to source new objects so they can be collected easier and or keep names from conflicting?

For instance I'm inputting Modules A,B,C into a cohesive campaign - I would love the ability to add stuff from Module A so that Bob (from A) doesn't conflict with Bob (from B).

I can do that with custom junk in the names - but I'm not fond of how that ends up looking. I was just wondering if there was a way to set a source it would be nice - and then I was thinking it could be some kind of global thing so if I turned it on - all my new stuff would get tagged 'module A' until I turned it off or switched it - greatly simplifying my life.

Of course I'm posting this here because I expect I'm doing it the hard way and there is already something that helps/does this in which case please point me in the right direction

[Silveras]

That differentiation is part of what Suffixes are for. So that if you add the suffix "A" to Bob from "A"... it will appear as "Bob (A)" in the navigation list, for example.

[Ckorik]

Ahhh - I've been using them for other things....

Like for an event I'll use the suffix to store the CR - because it puts it in a () it reads nice to see:

event (CR 4)

And for people I use them for titles.... Urg... didn't think to use them like that... especially considering that when you create a new topic you can't even the the suffix until it's created and you go to edit it.

[Avi]

Originally Posted by Ckorik

especially considering that when you create a new topic you can't even the the suffix until it's created and you go to edit it.

That's actually a very good point - I think suffixes should be part of quick create.
Maybe Prefix as well

[kbs666]

We had a discussion about this late last year and Rob says he's working on a solution.

[Ckorik]

Originally Posted by kbs666

We had a discussion about this late last year and Rob says he's working on a solution.

I can live with that as an answer also Thanks much!

[Silveras]

Originally Posted by Ckorik

especially considering that when you create a new topic you can't even the the suffix until it's created and you go to edit it.

That's true on the Quick Create screen.. but if you click on the "+" button on the Category header, you get the full Topic form with a new, blank entry.

[rob]

Originally Posted by Ckorik

Just curious - is there an easier way to source new objects so they can be collected easier and or keep names from conflicting?

For instance I'm inputting Modules A,B,C into a cohesive campaign - I would love the ability to add stuff from Module A so that Bob (from A) doesn't conflict with Bob (from B).

I can do that with custom junk in the names - but I'm not fond of how that ends up looking. I was just wondering if there was a way to set a source it would be nice - and then I was thinking it could be some kind of global thing so if I turned it on - all my new stuff would get tagged 'module A' until I turned it off or switched it - greatly simplifying my life.

Of course I'm posting this here because I expect I'm doing it the hard way and there is already something that helps/does this in which case please point me in the right direction

The suffix is definitely an option, although we've concluded that it's of limited use for this purpose. If you need to specify the suffix on everything, you've lost the battle of utility. Assigning the suffix requires lots of typing, which is tedious and error prone. So the suffix is something to be used only in specific situations. We've got an assortment of rules for this that we're using within the content we're developing, and those rules will be published soon. That document is being written now, in fits and starts, when I'm not working on everything else that needs to get done. The general rule is that suffixes are almost never used for source differentiation within story content, but they are used with some regularity on the mechanics side.

Personally, I believe that tags are the best solution for this. There's a mechanism for this that's been around for a long time. It's called scoping tags, and you can access it via the Tag button that's just to the left of the Home button above the content pane. You can setup a scoping context such that one or more tags are automatically assigned to all new topics/articles that get created. So you can setup a scoping tag for ModuleA and configure it to be auto-assigned before adding everything from ModuleA. Then do the same for ModuleB. And so on.

What we found, though, was that setting up and managing scoping tags ended up being more fiddly and error-prone than we initially anticipated. And nobody really used them. So the mechanism is definitely present and a viable option to consider, but I'm not sure that I'd characterize it as a "great" solution. To use it successfully, you'll need to be very disciplined.

Within published content, tags will be used for this purpose. Whenever you export material, each topic/article is assigned a corresponding tag. When you import that material, those topics will all possess the appropriate Import tag, which can be readily filtered upon.

One thing we changed late last year was the display of topics/articles within the Automatic Link Detection form. When there are multiple topics/articles that can match the given text, each is shown with its full containment hierarchy. This is really the absolute best way to differentiate things, in my opinion, since containment is used extensively to organize material and the containment path will clearly identify the disambiguated nature of something in 99% of cases.

The best thing about this change is that users don't have to do anything to avail themselves of its benefits. Bob1 can be distinguished from Bob2 based solely on the names of the topics up the tree above the two NPCs. Unless, of course, they both are contained by the same "Devo" topic. But that's a very special case that won't come up very often.

I'm honestly not remembering the conversation that @kbs666 is referring to wherein I'm apparently working on a solution. He's probably thinking of something that I'm viewing as slightly different from this particular question, so I'm not connecting the dots. If someone could refresh my memory, I'd appreciate it, since I don't want to drop the ball on something by simply forgetting it about due to all the crazy health-related stuff that went on the past couple months.

Hope this helps!

[kbs666]

Export tags are probably the solution you meant. The discussion was before those came out. It was when I suggested namespaces back in December or November.

[Ckorik]

Rob

Thanks for answering me - you saved me from the suffix route before I got to deep

That out of the way is there a chance we could see a way (dialog or some such) that would allow us to 'check' items to mass apply a tag? My thoughts are :

I have a world - with cities, villages, hamlets, people, dungeons - etc. Now ignoring the 'creation' aspect - that's all done - my players run into a minor side NPC who decides to become the big thorn in the plot - suddenly the game changes and they are onto new 'player named idea that sounded awesome so I'm running with it'.

Now I want to meta-integrate this and backfill - omg that's a ton of 'open - edit - tag' - it would be nice to be able to just be able to label things without having to edit each one at a time.

Once again - this may already be possible and I'm just not seeing it - and even if this is a pipe dream - I appreciate the program and the work involved - I also know at this stage if this kind of thing doesn't exist it would end up in a development queue that is most likely overwhelmed by getting the store ready for it's first public showcase.

Thanks again - honestly.